Sri Palavalasa Venkata Ramana, Srikakulam V. The ITO, Srikakulam

ITA 345/VIZ/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6581 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 29-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 12-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D J P ANAND

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 34 5 / VIZ /201 6 (ASST. YEAR : 20 11 - 12 ) PALAVALASA VENKATA RAMANA, S/O SANGAM NAIDU, PEDDAPURLI VILLAGE, R E GIDI AMADALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. V S . IT O , WARD - 1, SRIKAKULAM . PAN NO. BKKPP 1204 J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE . DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.J.P. ANAND - SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 09 / 1 0 /201 7 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09 / 1 0 /201 7 . O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 2 , GUNTUR , DATED 0 4 /0 5 /201 6 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 20 11 - 12 . 2. IN THIS CASE, N OTICE FOR HEARING WAS SENT AND DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 15 / 12 /2016 BY FIXING THE CASE ON 03/01/2017 . ON THAT DAY, NEITHER ASSESSEE ATTENDED NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. THEREAFTER, A S MANY AS 04 OPPORTUNITIES BY WAY OF ADJOURNMENTS HAVE BEEN GIVEN FOR ASSESSEES APPEARANCE, BUT OF NO AVAIL. EVEN TODAY ALSO I.E. ON 09/10/2017, NEITHER ASSESSEE REPRESENTED NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW 2 ITA NO. 345 /VIZ/2016 ( PALAVALASA VENKATA RAMANA ) THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFF ECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION, AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE COURTS AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), I DISMISS THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH IS 09 TH DAY OF OCTOBER , 201 7 . S D / - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 09 TH OCTOBER , 201 7 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE PALAVALASA VENKATA RAMANA, S/O SANGAM NAIDU, PEDDAPURLI VILLAGE, REGIDI AMADALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE - ITO, WARD - 1, SRIKAKULAM. 3. THE P CIT - 2, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE CIT(A) - 2, GUNTUR. 5. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER