SOHANLAL JAIN, MUMBAI V. CIT-I, THANE

ITA 2964/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7412 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NAVEEN GUPTA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH E: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP (AM) AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR (JM) ITA NO. 2964/MUM/2009 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06) SOHANLAL JAIN APPELLANT SUVIDHA DEVELOPERS, B-68 FLAT NO 101, SECTOR 1, SHANTI STAR BLDG, OPP TMT BUS STOP MIRA ROAD (E), THAN PAN : AAAHJ6368E V/S. CIT I, THANE RESPONDENT 1 ST FLOOR VARDHAN BLDG MIDC WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THANE APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NAVEEN GUPT A : O R D E R : PER R.S. PADVEKAR, J.M THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A)- I, THANE DATED 18.3.2009 PASSED U /S. 263 OF THE I.T. ACT RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2005-06. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR THE HEARING ON 31/3/20 10. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LD D.R. FOR THE REVENU E SHRI NAVEEN GUPTA WAS PRESENT AND NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SENT THE NOTICE BY REGISTERED A.D DT. 11/12/2010 INFORMI NG THE DATE OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EVEN CARED TO MOVE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT NOR REMAINED PRESENT FOR THE HEARING. WE ARE, THEREFOR E, OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING ITA NO. 2964/MUM/2009 2 THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V/S. CWT (223 IT R 480(MP) AND BY THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S . MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL), DISMISS THIS APPEAL AS NOT ADMITT ED. THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO MOVE APPROPRIATE APPLICATION WITH PRAYER TO RE-CALL THIS ORDER BY GIVING THE PROPER REASON AS TO WHY HE FAILED TO REM AIN PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IF ANY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2010. SD/- SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) (R.S. PADVEKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, ON THIS 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2010. :US COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT , 3.THE CIT(A)- I, MUMBAI 4.THE DR, E BENCH, MUMBAI 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT..REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. ITA NO. 2964/MUM/2009 3 `US DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 31/3/10 --------------- SR.P.S . 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHORITY 31/3/10 --------- ----- SR.P.S. 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED ----------- ---------- --- JM BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED ----------- ----------- -- JM/AM BY SECOND MEMBER 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO ----------- ------------ - SR.P.S. THE SR. P.S./P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON --------- ----------- -- SR.P.S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK --------- --------- ---- SR.P.S. 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE ------- --------- ---- 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER --------- --------- ----