Karnataka Engineers & Contractors, Mysore V. ITO, Mysore

ITA 491/BANG/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 49121114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1993-1994
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SUNDARARAJAN JT

Judgement Text

ITA.491/BANG/2012 PAGE - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'C', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.491/BANG/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-94) KARNATAKA ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS, NO.184, 10TH CROSS, GOKULAM 3RD STAGE, MYSORE .. APPELLANT PAN AAFFK4419C V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -1 (2), MYSORE .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. A. SUNDARARAJAN, JT. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 12.12.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.12.2012 O R D E R PER N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT : THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, KARNA TAKA ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS, MYSORE, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-94, AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED.31.01.2011 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), MYSORE. ITA.491/BANG/2012 PAGE - 2 02. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING FIXING THE DATE ON 12.12.2012 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND DISPATCHED TO THE ADDRES S GIVEN AGAINST COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM.36 BY THE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, KA RNATAKA ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS, NO.184, 10TH CROSS, GOKULA M 3RD STAGE, MYSORE. HOWEVER, THE HEARING NOTICE WAS RETURNED U NSERVED WITH THE POSTAL REMARK 'LEFT WITHOUT INSTRUCTIONS'. WHEN TH IS APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 12.12.2012, I.E., TODAY, AND WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED OUT, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE, NOR ANY LETTER SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS MADE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 03. FROM THE RECORDS IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INTIMATED ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS ALSO. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE BENCH FELT THAT NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED EVEN IF ANOTHER NOTICE I S SENT TO THE SAME ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE APPEAL MEMO. FURTHER, IT IS A N APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AND NORMALLY WE DO NOT SEND NOTICE THROUGH THE DR IN THE CASE OF APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEES. IN SUCH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REASON TO FURTHER ADJOURN THIS MATT ER BY ISSUING NOTICE TO THE WRONG ADDRESS AND HENCE WE HAVE NO OPTION EX CEPT TO PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FURTHER SINCE IT HAS NOT GIVEN THE CHANGED ADDRESS TO THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, WE DISMISS THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ITA.491/BANG/2012 PAGE - 3 04. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.12.2012. SD/- SD/- (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) (N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT