TVS Srichakra Limited, Madurai V. DCIT, Madurai

ITA 370/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9595 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ILAVARASI

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 3 70/MDS/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 1 0 - 1 1 M/S. TVS SRICHAKRA LIMITED, 10, JAWAHAR ROAD, MADURAI 625 002. [PAN: A A A C T5557G ] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , C IRCLE I ( 1 ) MADURAI 625 002. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : MS. R . ILAVARASI , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 11 . 0 4 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 26 . 0 4 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) I , MADURAI , DATED 22 . 12 .20 1 4 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 0 - 1 1 . 2 . TH IS APPEAL WAS IN ITIALLY POSTED FOR HEARING ON 18 .0 5 .201 5 AND WHEN THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED, DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE. FOR ONE REASON OR OTHER, T HE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 1 0 . 0 8 .201 5, 29.09.2015, 2910.2015, I.T.A. NO . 3 70 /M/ 15 2 04.02.2016 AND 11.04.2016 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE /LD. DR . WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 11 .0 4 .2016, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT . HOWEVER, THE BENCH FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY VAKALAT /POWER OF A TTORNEY IN FAVOUR OF ANY ADVOCATE OR CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ADVOCATE STANDS REJECTE D. HENCE, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. THEREFORE, HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 26 TH APRIL , 201 6 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 26 . 0 4 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.