Ideal Laminates Pvt. Ltd., Meerut V. ITO, Meerut

ITA 4790/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 479020114 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJNA

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4790/DEL/2015 ASSTT. YRS: 2005-06 IDEAL LAMINATES PVT. LTD., VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 214, BAGHPAT ROAD, WARD-1(3), MEERUT. MEERUT. PAN: AABCI 2415 H ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. DAM KANUNJNA SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12/11/2015. DATE OF ORDER : 12/11/2015. O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ORDER DATED 5-6- 2015, PASSED BY THE CIT(A), MEERUT, IN APPEAL NO. 30/13/14, RELATING TO A.Y. 2005-06. 2. NONE PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE HEARING. AN APPLICATION DATED 9-11-2015, FOR ADJOURNMENT OF HEA RING, ON THE GROUND OF NON AVAILABILITY OF ASSESSEES COUNSEL ON THE DATE OF H EARING I.E. 12-11-2015, IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE APPEAL RECORD, I FIND T HAT NO POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ARGUE THE APPEAL ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD. IT IS ALSO NOT KNOWN AS TO WHO AND UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY HAS SIGNE D THE APPLICATION FOR 2 ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING. THEREFORE, IN ABSENCE O F ANY POWER OF ATTORNEY ON RECORD, THE IMPUGNED APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT I S REJECTED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REMAINED ABSENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING BEFORE THE ITAT, DELIBERATELY, WITHOUT ANY SUFFICIENT CAUSE. IT ALSO GIVES AN IMPRESSION THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSU ING ITS APPEAL. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISION S OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) HAS BEEN HEL D AS UNDER: 'IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS 'TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFE RENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ' 5. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNE D THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND T HERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 6. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-47 8) HELD THAT THE 3 APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF AP PEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE C ASES CITED SUPRA, I DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 12/11/2015. SD/- (P.K. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 12/11/2015. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. 4 - + DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 06 - 11.2015 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 09.11.2015 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.