Sri. PAWAN MUNSHIRAM AGARWAL, MUMBAI V. ITO Wd. - 3(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2888/MUM/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 49523 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P C MAURYA SR
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2888/MUM/2005 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 SHRI PAVAN MUNSHIRAM AGARWAL, 206, BUILDING NO.2, GARDEN ENCLAVE, POKHARAN RD-2, SIDDHACHAL VASANT VIHAR, THANE (W) 400 607. PAN: AAOPA2121N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(4), THANE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. P.C. MAURYA, SR. A.R O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 19 TH APRIL, 2005 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-1, THANE DATED 16-02-20 05 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR A.Y. 2001 -2002. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 24-05-2011 BUT ADJOURNED TO 06-07-2011 AT THE ORAL REQUEST OF THE LEARNED D.R. FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON 1-06-2011 AT THE ADDRESS AS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ITEM NO. 10 OF FORM 36. HOW EVER, ON THE DATE OF HEARING WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED UPON FOR HEARIN G NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS ALSO NO APPLICATIO N OR REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT THEREFORE APPEARS TO US THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS ABOUT PURSING THIS APPEAL. HENCE FOLLOWING THE DECI SION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., REPOR TED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL), ITA NO.2888/MUM/2005 A.Y. 2001-2002: 2 AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, REPORTE D IN 223 ITR 480 (MP), AND FURTHER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DATED 17.09.2010 IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION O F INDIA IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009, WE DISMISS THIS APPEA L AS UNADMITTED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF JULY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 15 TH JULY, 2011. OKK* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-THANE. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CONCERNED 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH B, MUMBAI TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI