Amit Kothari, Mysore V. ITO, Mysore

ITA 507/BANG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73374 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K BIJU JT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.507/BANG/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI AMIT KOTHARI, C/O. L. PRAKASHA & ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATE & TAX CONSULTANTS, NO.22/29, IST FLOOR, 13 TH CROSS ROAD, 6 TH MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560 086. PAN : ADMPK 2903R VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.K. BIJU, JT. CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 15.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.01.2014 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER DATED 29.10.2010 OF THE CIT(APPEALS), MYSORE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. ITA NO.507/BANG/2011 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL TODAY I.E. , 15.01.2014, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THOUGH NOTICE O F HEARING FOR THIS DATE HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER RPAD PLACED ON RECORD. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS SHOW THAT THIS CASE WAS FIRS T POSTED ON 13.06.2012 AND HAS BEEN ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS EITHER DUE TO NON-APPEARANCE OR TIME SOUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. WHEN THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON THE LAST OCCASION I.E., ON 04.09.2013, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO FILE C ONCISE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. HOWEVER, DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL TODAY, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NEITHER ANY APPEARANCE NOR ANY COMMUNICATI ON FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT EVEN COMPLIED WITH TRIBUNALS DIRECTION OF FILING CONCISED GROUND S OF APPEAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO DI SPOSE THE CASE. WE ARE, THUS, LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO INFER THAT TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, F OLLOWING THE RATIO OF DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND CONSIDERING THE RATIO OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT AND VARIOUS HONBLE HIGH COURTS IN SUCH A SIT UATION; WE TREAT THE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEE IS, HOWEVER , AT LIBERTY TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL SHOWING OUT SUFFICIENT REASON(S) AND/OR RE ASONABLE CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THE CASE ON HIS BEHALF. ITA NO.507/BANG/2011 PAGE 3 OF 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014 . SD/- SD/- ( JASON P. BOAZ ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R BANGALORE, DATED, THE 15 TH JANUARY, 2014 . /D S/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/ SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.