DICHTA SEALS INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 274/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71661 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUM BAI . . , , BEFORE SHRI B. R. MITTAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA , AM ./ I.T.A. NO. 274/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) DICHTA SEALS INDIA PVT. LTD. 29, SEA GLIMPSE, SEVEN BUNGLOWS, J. P. ROAD, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI-400 061 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-8(1)(3) ROOM NO.206, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020 ! ./' ./PAN/GIR NO. AACCD 1860 E ( !# /APPELLANT ) : ( $!# / RESPONDENT ) !# % / APPELLANT BY : NONE $!# & % / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN ' ()* & + / DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2013 ,-. & + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.11.2013 / / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-16, MUMBAI (CIT(A) FOR SH ORT) DATED 22.11.2011, CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O.) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R (A.Y.) 2006-07 VIDE ORDER DATED 30.03.2011. 2 ITA NO. 274/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2006-07) DICHTA SEALS INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ITO 2. NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN ITS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION STANDS REC EIVED. IT WAS OBSERVED FROM THE ORDER SHEET ENTRIES ON THE FILE THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO RE PRESENTATION WHATSOEVER BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEAL, WITH THIS BEING THE THIRD DATE FOR W HICH THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HEARING, I.E., IGNORING THE DATE 25.04.2013, AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTIONED ON THAT DATE. THE NOTICE FOR THE HEARING FOR TODAY INSTANT WAS ISSUED PER RPAD, AND WHICH HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK UNSERVED WITH THE POSTAL REMARK MARKED LEFT, EVEN AS THE SAME BEARS THE CORRECT ADDRESS, I.E., AS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE FOR M NO.36. EVEN NO POWER OF ATTORNEY OR LETTER OF AUTHORITY STANDS FILED. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS IT APPEARS TO US, THE A SSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS OR EARNEST IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. AS CLARIFIED BY THE HON BLE APEX COURT IN CIT V. B.N. BHATTARCHARYA [1979] 118 ITR 461 (SC), PREFERRING AN APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERE FILING OF THE APPEAL MEMO, BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. WE , THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 (MP) AND BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DATED 17.09.2010 IN THE CASE OF CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA (IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009), AS WELL AS BY THE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH) IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P.) LTD ., REPORTED AT 38 ITD 320, DISMISSES THE ASSESSEES AP PEAL AS UN-ADMITTED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON NOVEMBER 21, 2013 SD/- SD/- (B. R. MITTAL) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' * MUMBAI; 0( DATED : 21.11.2013 ).(../ ROSHANI , SR. PS 3 ITA NO. 274/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2006-07) DICHTA SEALS INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ITO !' # $%&' (!'% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. !# / THE APPELLANT 2. $!# / THE RESPONDENT 3. ' 1 ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. ' 1 / CIT - CONCERNED 5. 4)56 $ (78 , + 78. , ' * / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 69: ;* / GUARD FILE !' ) / BY ORDER, */)+ , (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , ' * / ITAT, MUMBAI