RANGEELA EXPORTS, MUMBAI V. ADDL CIT RG 13(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4114/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7171 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANKUR GARG

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH D: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY (AM) AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR (JM) ITA NO. 4114/MUM/2009 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06) RANGEELA EXPORTS APPELLANT 246, INDIA HOUSE, ABDUL REHMAN STREET, MUMBAI 400 003 PAN : AADFR4227 V/S. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RESPONDENT RANGE -13(1), MUMBAI APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANKUR GARG : O R D E R : PER R.S. PADVEKAR, J.M THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE CIT(A)- XIII, MUMBAI DATED 16.04.2009 FOR T HE A.Y. 2005-06. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25.3.2010. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE AP PEAL MEMO BY REGISTERED POST A.D INTIMATING THE DATE OF HEARING WHICH HAS B EEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH REMARK THAT NOT KNOWN AT GIVEN A DDRESS, RETURNED TO SENDER. NO OTHER ADDRESS IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IF THERE IS A CHANGE OF THE ADDRESS, THEN THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE INFORMED THE SAME TO THE REGISTRY BY CARRYING OUT NECESSARY AMENDMENT TO THE APPEAL MEMO , BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. MOREOVER, IT IS SEEN THAT CERTAIN DEFECTS WE RE POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY, BUT THOSE ARE ALSO NOT REMOVED. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, ITA NO. 4114/MUM/2009 2 DISMISS THIS APPEAL AS NOT ADMITTED BY FOLLOWING TH E PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V/S. CWT (223 ITR 480(MP) AND BY THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 3 8 ITD 320 (DEL). 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010. SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (R.S. PADVEKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, ON THIS 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010. :US COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT , 3.THE CIT(A)- XIII, MUMBAI 4.THE CIT -13, MUMBAI 5.THE DR, D BENCH, MUMBAI 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT..REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. ITA NO. 4114/MUM/2009 3 US DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 25/3/10 --------------- SR.P.S . 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHORITY 26/3/10 --------- ----- SR.P.S. 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED ----------- ---------- --- JM BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED ----------- ----------- -- JM/AM BY SECOND MEMBER 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO ----------- ------------ - SR.P.S. THE SR. P.S./P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON --------- ----------- -- SR.P.S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK --------- --------- ---- SR.P.S. 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE ------- --------- ---- 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER --------- --------- ----