UNIVERSAL ARTS LTD ( FORMALLY KNOWN AS TABASSUM INTERNATIONAL LTD), MUMBAI V. ACIT 4(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5473/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 55967 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANTAN BOSE
• Keywords: Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 5473/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20001-02. UNIVERSAL ARTS LTD., ASSTT. COMMISSIONER (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TABASSUM VS. OF INCOME-TAX- 4(3), INTERNATIONAL LTD.), MUMBAI. 45 GANPATI BHAVAN, M.G. ROAD, GOREGAON (WEST), MUMBAI 400062. PAN : AACCG4664P. APPELLANT. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SHANTAN BOSE . DATE OF HEARING : 17-11-2011. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-11-2011. O R D E R. PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-XIV, MUMBAI DATED 24-07-2009. 2. IN THIS CASE, HEARING WAS INITIALLY FIXED BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL ON 11-06-2010, THE SAME, HOWEVER, WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST MAD E ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN WRITING. THEREAFTER HEARINGS FIXED FROM TIME TO TI ME ON 6-10-2010, 17-01-2011, 11-05-2011 AND 18-07-2011 ALSO GOT ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. FINALLY THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEAR ING ON 17-11-2011 AND NOTICE OF 2 ITA NO.5473/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 THE SAME WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH NOTICE B OARD WELL IN ADVANCE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED ON 17-11-2011, NOBODY, HOWEVE R, HAS PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. IT APPEARS FROM THIS NON-COOPERATIVE AND NON-COMPLIANT ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APP EAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS NARRATED ABOVE AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS CONSI DERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) P. LTD. 38 ITD 3 20 (DEL.) AND BY HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS U NADMITTED AND DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON COMPLIANCE AND FOR R ECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECAL LED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF NOV., 2011. SD/- SD /- (R.S.PADVEKAR) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 25 TH NOV., 2011. WAKODE 3 ITA NO.5473/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, F-BENCH. 6. GUARD FILE. (TRUE COPY ) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.