Enn Zen Enterprises (P) Ltd., Chandigarh V. ACIT, Chandigarh

ITA 475/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73608 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.475/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S ENN ZEN ENTERPRISES (P) LTD., VS THE ACIT, # 1506, CIRCLE 4(1), SECTOR 40B, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN : AAACE2724J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 27.03.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.03.2014 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CHANDIGARH DAT ED 08.02.2012 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ( 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 06.06.2012 A ND NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS ADJOU RNED TO 12.07.2012 ON WHICH DATE ALSO, THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, THE APPEAL WAS FIXED ON 15.10.2012, 24. 12.2012 ON WHICH DATES, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. THE APPEAL WAS THEN FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25.02.2013 ON WHICH DATE, THERE WAS REPR ESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 18.04.2013 ON WHICH DATE THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. ON THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING I.E. 31.07.2013, THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND 2 THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 15.10.2013. THE CASE WA S THEN FIXED FOR HEARING ON 18.02.2014 AND THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE ON 27.03.2014. ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 27.03.2014, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 46L [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO: I) CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD: 38 ITD 320 (DE L) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT: 223 ITR 480(MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS [SUPRA], WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSEC UTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH MARCH,2014. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWL A) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICI AL MEMBER DATED: 28 TH MARCH,2014 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHD.