IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUM BAI .. , !,#$ # % BEFORE SHRI B. R. MITTAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA , AM ./ I.T.A. NOS.4854 & 4855/MUM/2011 ( ' ( )( ' ( )( ' ( )( ' ( )( / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 & 2001-02) NATIONAL STEEL AND AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. 621, TULSIANI CHAMBER, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI ' ' ' ' / VS. ASST. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 40, MUMBAI * #$ ./ + ./ PAN/GIR NO. AAACN 3548 H ( *, / APPELLANT ) : ( -.*, / RESPONDENT ) *, / # / APPELLANT BY : NONE -.*, 0 / # / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O. P. SINGH ' 0 12$ / // / DATE OF HEARING : 25.07.2013 3 ) 0 12$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.07.2013 #4 / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THESE ARE A SET OF TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE, I.E ., FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS, BEING A.Y. 2000-01 AND 2001-02, A GITATING THE PART CONFIRMATION OF THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS PURSUANT TO THE ASSESSMENTS FOR TH OSE YEARS COMPLETED U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT, BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-38, MUMBAI (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) VIDE HIS COMBINED ORDER DATED 22.02.2011 . 2 ITA NOS.4854 & 4855/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 00-01 & 01-02) NATIONAL STEEL & AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. ASST. CIT 2. NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN ITS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING. EVEN ON AN EARLIER OCCASION, I.E., 26.04.2 012, THERE HAS BEEN NO REPRESENTATION BY THE ASSESSEE, EVEN AS THE NOTICE FOR HEARING HAD BE EN DULY SERVED THROUGH REGISTERED POST (ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON RECORD). THE DATES OF HEARING AR E PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT, BESIDES BEING POSTED ON THE NOTICE BOARD, IF NOT ON THE TRI BUNALS WEBSITE AS WELL. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT FILED ANY POWER OF ATTORNEY OR LETTER OF AUTHORITY IN FAVOUR OF ANY COUNSEL. IT IS CLEAR THEREFORE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN P URSUING ITS INSTANT APPEALS. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS IT APPEARS TO US, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS OR EARNEST IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. AS CLARIFIED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN CIT V. B.N. BHATTARCHARYA [1979] 118 ITR 461 (SC), PREFERRING AN APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ME RE FILING OF THE APPEAL MEMO, BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING T HE DECISIONS BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 (MP) AND BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT D ATED 17.09.2010 IN THE CASE OF CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA (IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009), AS WELL AS BY THE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P.) LTD ., REPORTED AT 38 ITD 320, DISMISSES THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AS UN-ADMITTED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE D ISMISSED IN LIMINE . 5 16 ' (51 0 $5 0 1 78 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 25, 2013 SD/- SD/- (B. R. MITTAL) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 9' DATED : 25.07.2013 .'../ ROSHANI , SR. PS 3 ITA NOS.4854 & 4855/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 00-01 & 01-02) NATIONAL STEEL & AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. ASST. CIT #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *, / THE APPELLANT 2. -.*, / THE RESPONDENT 3. < ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. < / CIT - CONCERNED 5. :?@ -1' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. @A( B / GUARD FILE #4' #4' #4' #4' / BY ORDER, C CC C/ // /7 7 7 7 (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI