BAADER SCHULZ LABORATORIES, MUMBAI V. ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4688/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 54823 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K NAYAK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, B, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND RAJENDRA SINGH(A .M ) ITA NO.4688/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06) M/S BAADER SCHULZ LABORATORIES, SHANTIVILLA, SHANTIVAN TOWER COMPOUND, DEVIDAS LANE, NEAR CLUB ACAQUARIA, BORIVALI (W), MUMBAI-400103 PAN: AACFB8402B ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 25(1), R.NO.202, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA(E), (MUMBAI APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 9.8.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 9.8.2011 APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K.NAY AK O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 9.6.2009 PASSED BY THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. IN THIS CASE, AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, TH E CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 20.1.2011. THEREAFTER, THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS PLACED ON THE NOTICE BOARD FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 30.3.2011, 9.6.2011 AND 9.8.2011. EVEN ON LAST DATE I.E. 9.8.2011, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOU RNMENT OF ITA NO.4688/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06) 2 THE CASE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTE RESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBL E SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANR. (118 ITR 461) (AT PAGES 477/478) THAT APPEAL DOES N OT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL. COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMI SS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION AS HELD BY THE HONBLE B OMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION O F INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UN ADMITTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE SHALL, HOWEVER, BE AT LIBERTY TO AP PROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER, IF PREVEN TED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9.8.2011. SD SD (RAJENDRA SINGH ) (D.K.AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 9TH AUGUST, 2011 SRL: ITA NO.4688/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06) 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI