Sahajanand Laser Technology Limited, Gandhinagar V. The ACIT.,(OSD)Circle-8, Ahmedabad

ITA 338/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 33820514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T SHANKAR

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD , !.. , #$ # % BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.338/AHD/2010 ( ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD. E-30, GIDC ELECTRONIC ESTATE SECTOR-26 GANDHINAGAR ' ' ' ' / VS. ACIT (OSD) CIRCLE-8 AHMEDABAD ) #$ ./*+ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAGCS 1983 B ( ), / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( -.), / RESPONDENT ) ), / # / APPELLANT BY : NONE -.), 0 / # / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.SHANKAR, SR. D.R. '1 0 $ / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 31/12/2012 23( 0 $ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.12.2012 #4 / O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING FRO M THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)-XIV, AHMEDABAD DATED 02/12/2009 PASSED FO R A.Y. 2006-07. 2. WE HAVE NOTED THAT IN THE PAST SEVERAL OPPORTUNI TIES OF HEARING WERE GRANTED. ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT, LD.AR H AD SOUGHT FEW ADJOURNMENTS IN THE PAST WHICH WERE GRANTED BUT THE RE WAS NO END OF SEEKING ADJOURNMENT AFTER ADJOURNMENT. THEREFORE, ON 22/10/2012, THE ITA NO. 388/AHD/2010 SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD. VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR - 2 - RESPECTED BENCH HAS NOTED THAT ALTHOUGH AN ADJOURNM ENT APPLICATION WAS PLACED FOR CONSIDERATION BUT NOBODY IN PERSON WAS P RESENT TO REPRESENT THE SAID PETITION OF ADJOURNMENT. IT WAS THOUGHT P ROPER TO GIVE AN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY, BUT WITH THE IMPOSITION OF COS T OF RS.1,000/-. THE CASE WAS THEREFORE ADJOURNED FOR 31/12/2012, I.E. T ODAY. NO ONE IS PRESENT BEFORE US. IT APPEARS THAT THE APPELLANT I S NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED TO PURSUE THIS APPEAL. THE APPELLANT THROUGH HIS L D.AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IS IN THE HABIT OF FILING ADJOURNMEN T APPLICATION THROUGH DAK AND THE REGISTRY IS MECHANICALLY PLACING THOS E APPLICATIONS IN THE PAST BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BUT THOSE APPLICATIONS WER E NEVER ATTENDED BY THE APPLICANT. THIS IS NOT A FAIR OR A REASONABLE PRACTICE ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT. THIS PRACTICE HAS TO BE CURTAILED. WE THEREFORE HOLD THAT SINCE THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN REPRESENTING THI S APPEAL, HENCE FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) AND DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DELHI), THIS APPEAL IS HEREBY DISMISSED BEING NOT REPRESENTED. 3. ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. SD/- SD/- ( !.. ) ( ) #$ ( T.R. MEENA ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 31 / 12 /2012 !..', .'../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO. 388/AHD/2010 SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD. VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR - 3 - #4 0 -5 6#5( #4 0 -5 6#5( #4 0 -5 6#5( #4 0 -5 6#5(/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ), / THE APPELLANT 2. -.), / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 7 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 7() / THE CIT(A)-XIV, AHMEDABAD 5. 5:; -' , , / LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ; <1 / GUARD FILE. #4' #4' #4' #4' / BY ORDER, .5 - //TRUE COPY// = == =/ // / * * * * ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DIRECT DICTATION ON COMPUTER DATED 31.12.1 2. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 31.12.12. OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S 31.12.12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 31.12.12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER