Stay Sharp Diamond Tools P.Ltd., Mumbai V. JCIT Special Range 25, Mumbai

ITA 5338/MUM/2004

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8097 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 14-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2004
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMEET KUMAR SR DR PER R K

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO.5338/MUM/2004 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI J J J J BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE SHRI D MANMOHAN, VP & SHRI D MANMOHAN, VP & SHRI D MANMOHAN, VP & SHRI D MANMOHAN, VP & SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. 5338/MUM/2004 5338/MUM/2004 5338/MUM/2004 5338/MUM/2004 (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR 1996 1996 1996 1996- -- -97 9797 97) )) ) STAY SHARP DIAMOND TOOLS PVT LTD KARMACHAND MANSION BARRACK RAD BEHIND METRO CINEMA MUMBAI 400 020 VS THE JT COMMR OF INCOME TAX SPL. RANGE 25, MUMBAI ( (( (APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT) )) ) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO.AAACS9975P AAACS9975P AAACS9975P AAACS9975P A SSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI SUMEET KUMAR. SR DR PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER DATED 23.2.2004 OF THE CIT(A) - XXI MUMBAI RELATING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR1996-97. 2 THIS IS AN OLD APPEAL AND WAS GETTING ADJOURNED F ROM TIME TO TIME SINCE 7.5.2007. THIS CASE WAS LAST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 4.1.2011 AND WAS ADJOURNED TO 14.3.2011. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED AT THE TIME OF HEARING N OR ANY ADJOURNMENT PETITION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE WAS FILED FROM THE ASSESSEE. THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS NOT ADMITTED BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT(223 ITR 480(MP) AND BY THE DELHI BENC H OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT LTD (38 ITD 32 0 (DEL). 3 HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATI ON CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEA RING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY AT ITS DISCRETION RECALL THIS ORDER. 2 ITA NO.5338/MUM/2004 4 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF H EARING I.E. 14. MAR 2011. SD/- SD/- ( (( ( D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN ) )) ) VICE PRESIDENT ( (( ( R K PANDA R K PANDA R K PANDA R K PANDA ) )) ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED:21 ST MAR 2011 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI