SHRUTI ART P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CIR 14, MUMBAI

ITA 2659/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59724 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK BATRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH E MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. MITTAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI T.R. SOOD (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.2659/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-07 M/S. SHRUTI ART PVT. LTD., C/O JAYESH SANGHRAJKA & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, UNIT NO. 405, HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE, D.S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI-400 014 PAN-AAFCS 3593L VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 14, OLD CGO, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI VIVEK BATRA DATE OF HEARING :31.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:31.01.2012 O R D E R PER B.R. MITTAL, JM : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DT. 18.1.2011 ON FOLLOWING GROU ND: THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND LAW BOTH BY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDERVALUATION OF CLOSIN G STOCK. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 3 1 ST JANUARY, 2012. NO ONE IS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. NOR THERE IS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT ASSE SSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. HENCE THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N. BHATTACHARGEE A ND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN ITA NO. 2659/M/11 2 118 ITR 460 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEI R LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. IN THIS REGARD WE ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE DECIS ION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL). 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE PRO VISION OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSE D FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING I.E. ON 31.01.2012. SD/- SD/- ( T.R. SOOD) (B.R. MITTAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 31 ST JANUARY, 2012 RJ COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR E BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, MUMBAI