ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL AGENCIES, MUMBAI V. DCIT 18(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4075/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8695 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (AM) AND SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHA VAN (JM) ITA NO. 4075/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2005-06) ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL AGENCIES, D.C. BOTHRA & CO., CAS,297, TARDEO ROAD, WILLIE MANSION, NANACHOWK, 1 ST FLOOR, OPP. BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI-400 007 PAN-AABFA 2768C VS. THE DCIT 18(1), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, MUMBAI-400 012 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR O R D E R PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XVIII, MUMBAI DATED 2.4.2009 FOR THE A.Y .2005-06. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23.11.2010 B UT WAS ADJOURNED TO 20.01.2011 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILED ANY APP LICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THESE APPEALS. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HON 'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR. (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE S 477/478) THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PUR SUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPE AL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSEC UTION AS HELD BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL ITA NO.4075/M/09 2 NO.62 OF 2009. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE SHALL, HOWEVER, BE AT LIBERTY TO AP PROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER, IF PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2011 SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ( ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER MUMBAI, DATED 28 TH JANUARY, 2011. RJ COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CENTRAL - I CONCERNED 5. THE DR A BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, MUMBAI ITA NO.4075/M/09 3 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: 20 . 01. 201 1 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR: 20 . 01 .201 1 ______ SR. PS/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/ PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: ______ SR. PS/PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: ______ 9 DATE ON W HICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10 . DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: ______