Dev Bhoomi Development Society, Solan V. ITO, Parwanoo

ITA 513/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6202 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.513/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 DEV BHOOMI DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY VS THE INCOME TAX OF FICER, SHANKAR BHAWAN, PARWANOO. VPO CHANDI, TEHSIL KASAULI, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PAN : AAATD8836D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING : 08.07.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.07.2014 ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) LUDHIANA DATED 12.02.2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143( 3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ( 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 01.08.2013 ON WHICH DATE NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS ADJOURNED TO 15.10.2013 . THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION ON 15.10.2013 AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED S INE-DIE. THEN THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 08.02.2014 FOR WHICH DATE, NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. ON 18.02.2014 LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT AND BY GIVING LA ST OPPORTUNITY, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 25.03.2014. ON 25.03.2014, L D. AR FOR THE 2 ASSESSEE AGAIN REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT AND THE CA SE WAS ADJOURNED TO 09.04.2014. ON 09.04.2014, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED T O 22.04.2014 AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON 22.04. 2014, THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SENT AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT AN D THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 08.07.2014 BUT ON 08.07.2014, NONE APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RE CEIVED. 3. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. 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 THEI R LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 5. 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) 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS [SUPRA], WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH JULY,2014. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH JULY,2014 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHD.