Sh. Virender Sharma, Chandigarh V. ITO, Chandigarh

ITA 41/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 63953 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILESH GUPTA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.41 /CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) SH.VIRENDER SHARMA VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SCF 23, SECTOR 16, WARD 1(4), CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AEFPS1681C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 03.10.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10.2012 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), CHANDIGARH DA TED 04.11.2011 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 26.6.2012 AND THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED TO 9.7.2012, 6.8.2012 AN D THEN 7.8.2012 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON THE LAST APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 3.10.201 2, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS M OVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INT ERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE IS 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. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN T HEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : 2 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 APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSEC UTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 4 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 4 TH OCTOBER, 2012 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH