DATAXCESS INTERGRATED TECHNOLOGY LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT 8(10, MUMBAI

ITA 4497/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59661 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C G K NAIK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL (JM) & SHRI T.R. SOOD (AM) I.T.A. NO.4497/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2006-07) M/S. DATAXCESS INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY LTD., PLOT NO.17F, TECHNOLOGY CENTRE, MIDC, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI-400 093. PAN: AAACH1424L VS. ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX-8(1), AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY NONE. RESPONDENT BY SHRI C. G.K. NAIK. DATE OF HEARING 16-01-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 -01-2012 O R D E R PER T.R. SOOD, AM : THIS APPEAL APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER DATED 11-03-2010 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-16, MUMBAI. RE LATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED AT THE TIME OF HEARING I.E. 16-01-2012 NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN MOVED. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE THUS IS NOT SER IOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS STATED ABOVE AND KEEP ING IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE T RIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) (DEL) AND BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ITA NO.4497/MUM/2010 DATAXCESS INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY LTD. 2 ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKER VS. CWT AS REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL EXPLAIN ING THE REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATI SFIED, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 16 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 16 TH JANUARY, 2012. NG: COPY TO : 1. DEPARTMENT. 2.ASSESSEE. 3 CIT(A)-16,MUMBAI. 4 CIT-VIII,MUMBAI. 5.DR,D BENCH,MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER, ASS T. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. ITA NO.4497/MUM/2010 DATAXCESS INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY LTD. 3 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATI ON 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 16-01-2012 SR.PS/ 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 16-01-2012 SR.PS/ 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/A M 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/ 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/ 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/ 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER