M/s A. P. Engineering Corporation, Kolkata V. ITO, Wd-51(4), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 268/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9599 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 27-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C, BENC H KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM ITA NO.268/KOL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 M/S A. P. ENGINEERING CORPORATION, AF-321, RABINDRAPALLY, RALBAGAN, KESTOPUR, KOLKATA-700101 VS. ITO, WARD- 51(4), KOLKATA PAN/GIR NO.: AAFFA 1859 E ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 03/01/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03/01/2 017 O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2013 OF CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA, RELATING TO AY 2008-09. 2. THIS APPEAL CAME FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 03.01 .2017. THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING BY REGISTERED POST WITH AD ON 09.11.2016 TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO.10 O F FORM NO.36. HOWEVER NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL A S ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT PET ITION WAS FILED IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT I NTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM TH E FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSH IPS HAVE HELD THAT : 2 ITA NO.268/KOL/2014 M/S A.P.ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2 THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION O F THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT B OUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPR ESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURN MENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE R EVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF I NHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW O F THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON -COMPLIANCE ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COUR T ON 03/01/2017 SD/- SD/- [A.T. VARKEY ] [ DR. ARJUN LAL SA INI ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER DATED : 03/01/2017 PRAKASH MISHRA , / PS 3 ITA NO.268/KOL/2014 M/S A.P.ENGINEERING CORPORATION 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, 1. THE APPELLANT- M/S A.P.ENGINEERING CORP. 2. THE RESPONDENT.-ITO WARD-51(4), KOLKATA 3. THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY