Smt. Hafisa A. Khalique Kothiwala Legal heir of Abdulkhalique G. Kothiwala, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharuch

ITA 2939/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1866 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P S CHOUDHARY

Judgement Text

SMT.HAFISA A.KHALIQUE KOTHIWALA VS. ITO, WARD-3, BHARUCH/ITA NO.2939/AHD/2015/A.Y.2010-11 PAGE 1 OF 2 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT , . . , BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . . ./ I.T.A. NO.2939/AHD/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SMT.HAFISA A.KHALIQUE KOTHIWALA, LEGAL HEIRS OF ABDULKHALIQUE G.KHOTHIWALA) TANSIM & ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 206, 2 ND FLOOR, B.G.TRADE CENTRE, ABOVE P.D.SHROFF OFFICE, PANCHBATTI, BHARUCH 392 001. [PAN: AFQPK 2971 M] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, BHARUCH 392 001. APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY NONE. /REVENUE BY SHRI P.S.CHOUDHARY SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING: 11 . 0 1 .201 9 /PRONOUNCEMENT ON: 11 .01.2019 /O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, JM: 1. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 07.07.2015 OF CIT(A)-3, VADODARA PERTAINING 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON ABOVE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE, DESPITE THIS THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNPRESENTED. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED. ON THE WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE ON 07.12.2018 IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES, ACCORDINGLY SINCE THE ASSESSEE DESPITE BEING AWARE OF THE CHOSEN TO REMAIN UNPRESENTED. 2. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ON EACH OF THE OCCASIONS THE APPEAL COME FOR HEARING I.E. 24.05.2018, 11.07.2018 AND 07.12.2018 THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CANNOT BE PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUSLY PURSUING THE APPEAL BY THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. SMT.HAFISA A.KHALIQUE KOTHIWALA VS. ITO, WARD-3, BHARUCH/ITA NO.2939/AHD/2015/A.Y.2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE FOR DISMISSAL IN THE LIGHT OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS BY HON`BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B. N. BHATTACHARJEE & OTHERS 118 ITR 461(SC), WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIP HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. FURTHER, THE HON`BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THEIR LORDSHIP OBSERVE AS THAT IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. FURTHER, IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL). 4. IN CASE, THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT IT IS SERIOUSLY IN PURSUING THE APPEAL THEN LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO BROUGHT FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING APPROPRIATE ADJOURNMENT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 6. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11-01-2019. SD/- SD/- ( .. / O.P.MEENA) ( /DIVA SINGH) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( /JUDICIAL MEMBER) / SURAT, DATED : 11 TH JANUARY , 2019/ S.GANGADHARA RAO, SR.PS COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SURAT