Narsimha Goud Pudari, Secunderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), Hyderabad

ITA 419/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6564 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N SWAPNA

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI DUVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 419/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 NARSIMHA GOUD PUDARI, SECUNDERABAD. PAN AJSPP 2914 P VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 15(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. N. SWAPNA DATE OF HEARING : 10-07-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-07-2018 O R D E R PER DUVURU R.L. REDDY, J.M.: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF DATED 26/12/2017 OF CIT(A) 5, HYDERABAD, FOR AY 2 014-15. 2. INITIALLY, THIS APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING O N 01/06/2018 AND SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 15/06/2018, FOR WHICH, NOTICE WAS SENT BY RPAD. ON 15/06/2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE , HENCE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 10/07/2018, WHICH WAS ANNOUNC ED IN THE OPEN COURT. WHEN THE APPEAL CAME FOR HEARING ON 10/07/2 018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THERE IS A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE C ASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING I T EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE TH E APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE A PPEAL FOR NON- 2 ITA NO. 419 /HYD/2018 NARASIMHA GOUD PUDARI, SECBAD PROSECUTION AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO . 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF T HE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MA DHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DI SMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. EVEN ON MERITS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESS EE, AN INDIVIDUAL, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN LIQUOR UNDER NAME AND STYLE SLNS WINES, FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2014-15 ADMITTING AN INCOME OF RS. 15,31,350/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CAS E WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS ON THE GROUND LOW INCOME F ROM TCS RECEIPTS-LIQUOR AND THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMEN T DETERMINING THE INCOME AT RS. 51,64,951/- BY ESTIMATING THE NET PROFIT AT 5% ON THE STOCK PUT TO SALE. WHEN THE ASSESSEE CARRIED TH E MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SAME AS NON-EST O NIL ON THE GROUND TH AT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 06/01/2017 IN PAPER FORMAT IN-STEAD OF E- FILING THE SAME, WHICH IS MANDATORY. 4. SINCE, THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) ARE UNCONTROVERTED, WE UPHO LD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JULY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (DUVURI R.L. REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 13 TH JULY, 2018. KV 3 ITA NO. 419 /HYD/2018 NARASIMHA GOUD PUDARI, SECBAD COPY TO:- 1) NARSIMHA GOUD PUDARI, C/O SIRIVELLA VENKATE SWARA RAO, CA, 1-10-285/6, FLAT NO. 203, SHREE YASH TOWERS , ECIL X ROADS, HYDERABAD 500 062. 2) ITO, WARD 11(3), HYD. 3) CIT(A) 5, HYDERABAD. 4) PR. CIT 5, HYD. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., H YDERABAD. 6) GUARD FILE