Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7009 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
10-08-2017
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
15-02-2017
Assessment Year
2010-2011
Appeal Filed On
08-01-2015
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.402/CHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) NAHAR INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., VS. THE A.C.I.T., FOCAL POINT, LUDHIANA. CIRCLE-VII, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, RISHI NAGAR, LUDHIANA. PAN: AACCN3563A AND ITA NO.37/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) OSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD., VS. THE ADDL.C.I.T., G.T. ROAD, SHERPUR, RANGE-VII, LUDHIANA. AAYAKAR BHAWAN, RISHI NAGAR, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACO1973F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE(APPLICATION REJECTED) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GULSHAN RAJ, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.08.2017 O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEES AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 19.2.2014 AND 29.10.2014 RESPECTIVELY, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2010- 11. 2. THE ASSESSEES IN BOTH THE CASES HAVE FILED APPLI CATIONS FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND OF ILLNESS OF THEIR A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MR.NAVDEEP SHARMA. HOWEVER, NO EVI DENCE OF THE SAME HAS BEEN FILED. MOREOVER, WE FIND THAT THE 2 ASSESSEES HAVE BEEN REPEATEDLY SEEKING ADJOURNMENTS IN BOTH THE CASES. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEALS AND THE INSTANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACH ARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGE S 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSES ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 10 TH AUGUST, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
