Shri Sodha Vaju Bhai, Kolkata V. The ITO, Wd-1, Haldia, Haldia

ITA 351/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1467 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAURABH KUMAR

Judgement Text

, B , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3 5 1 / KOL / 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 SHRI SODHA VAJU BHAI NO.8, MEERA MADHAV RESIDENCY, NR. ALESHWAR BUNGLOWS, P.O. BOPAL, AHMEDABDA-380 058 [ PAN NO.AEYPB 6268 D ] V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HALDIA, WEST BENGAL /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT NONE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI SAURABH KUMAR, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 19-09-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19-09-2017 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE OR DER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-7, KOLKATA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 DATED 19.02.2013. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UPON FOR HEARING NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT W AS FILED, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD AT THE ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE AS SESSEE IN COLUMN 10 OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL IN FORM NO. 36. FROM THE ABOVE, IT I S INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS CASE. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING I N VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF ITA NO.351/KOL/2015 A.Y. 2010 -11 SH. SODHA VAJU BHAI VS. ITO WD.1, HALDIA PAGE 2 CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), TH E ASSESSEES APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) HAS HELD AS UNDER: ' IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MA DE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAP ER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ' 5. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFE RENCE AN ANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSI STANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 6. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-47 8) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFF ECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CA SES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, T HEN IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING AN APPROPRIATE PET ITION, AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLO SE OF THE HEARING ON 19 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017 SD/- SD/- ($%&) ( %&) (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S (%)*- 19 / 09 /201 7 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-SH. SODHA VAJU BHAI NO.8, MEER MADHAV RESIDEN CY, NR. BALESHWAR BUNGLOWS P.O. BOPAL, AHMEDB AD-380 058, GUJARAT 2. /RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-1, HALDIA, WEST BENGAL 3.)2)3 4 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 4- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.789$$3 , 3 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.9;<=> / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ %, /TRUE COPY/ SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/DDO 3 ,