Freedom Fighter Shri Ram Nath Khaira, Jhansi V. C.I.T.-II, Agra

ITA 462/AGR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 46220314 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 462/AGRA/2010 FREEDOM FIGHTER SHRI RAM NATH KHAIRA MEMORIAL SOCIT Y, VS. C.I.T.-II, C/O RAM NATH VIMLA DEVI KHAIRA INSTITUTE OF EDUCATI ON, AGRA. 221, TALAIYA, JHANSI (PAN : AAAAF 8741 F). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 08.08.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 08.08.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT-II, AGRA DATED 30.08.2010 REJECTING THE APPLICATION U/S . 12AA OF THE IT ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS STATED TO HAVE BEEN RUNN ING AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. IT WAS, HOWEVER, FOUND THAT THERE ARE REGULAR SELF-WITHDRAWALS IN ADDITION TO CASH WITHDRAWALS IN DIFFERENT NAMES AND IT WAS NOT CLARIFIED AS TO HOW THE FAMILY MEMBERS WERE MAKING WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK. THE LD. CIT ALSO FOUND THAT THERE IS NO DISSOLUTION CLAUSE IN THE ME MORANDUM OF SOCIETY. CONSIDERING VARIOUS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPLICATION U/S. 12AA WAS REJECTED. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT VARIOUS ADJOURNMENTS IN THIS MATTER FOR PREPARING THE CASE THOROUGHLY AND ULTIMATELY ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING 2 08.08.2012, NOBODY APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF ASSESS EE. IT THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS A PPEAL AND FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEP TO EXPLAIN THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR REJECTING THE APPLICATION IN QUESTION. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HONBLE M.P. HIGH CO URT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(MP) DISM ISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIM ILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTEREST ED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08.08.2012. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY