AMU PROPERTIES & FINANCE P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT (OSD) 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3655/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8919 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH A,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (AM) & SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR (J M) I.T.A.NO.3655/MUM/2010 (A.Y.2005-06) M/S. AMU PROPERTIES & FINANCE PVT. LTD., CRESCENT CHAMBERS, GR. FLOOR, HOMI MODI CROSS STREET, FORT, MUMBAI-400 001. PAN: AAACA3777F. VS. ASST.COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX (OSD)-2(1), AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 002. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY NONE. RESPONDENT BY SHRI S HRAVAN KUMAR. O R D E R PER R.S. SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 26-02-2010 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 05-06. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE HEARING WAS INITIALLY FIXED BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 14-10- 2010. HOWEVER, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION ON 14-10- 2010 AND THEREFORE THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 27-10-2010. AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION EVEN ON 27-10-2010, THE HEARING WAS FURTHER ADJOURNED TO 03 -11-2010. AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL VIDE LETTER DATED 03-11-2010 , THE HEARING FIXED ON 03-11- 2010 WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE. SINCE THE AMOUNT INVOL VED IN APPEAL IS RS.61,50,000/-, THE APPEAL WAS TRANSFERRED TO DIVIS ION BENCH AND POSTED FOR HEARING ON 11-01-2011. NOTICE FOR THE HEARING FIXED ON 11-01-2011 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD AND DULY SERVED ON IT. HOWEVER , NOBODY HAS PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED ON 11-01-2011 ITA 3655/M/10 2 NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN MO VED. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE THUS IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSEC UTING ITS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS STATED ABOVE AND KEEP ING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. REPORTED IN 38 ITD 3 20 (DEL) AND BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLDER VS. CWT AS REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON-PROSECUTION . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL EXPLAIN ING THE REASONS FOR NON- COMPLIANCE AND FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND IF T HE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2 011. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (R.S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI:14TH JANUARY , 2011. NG: COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE. 2.DEPARTMENT. 3 CIT(A)-4,MUMBAI. 4 CIT-II,MUMBAI. 5.DR,A BENCH,MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER, ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. ITA 3655/M/10 3 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNA TION 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 11-01-2010 SR.PS/ 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 11-01-2010 SR.PS/ 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/ AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/ 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/ 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/ 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER