M/s Damini Resorts & Builders (P) Ltd., Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 553/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6834 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDER KANTADR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.793/CHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) M/S DAMINI RESORTS & VS. THE D.C.I.T., BUILDERS (P) LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, SCO-1, BASANT AVENUE, LUDHIANA. DUGRI ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACD6211B AND ITA NO.553/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) M/S DAMINI RESORTS & VS. THE A.C.I.T., BUILDERS (P) LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, SCO-1, BASANT AVENUE, LUDHIANA. DUGRI ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACD6211B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT.CHANDER KANTA,DR DATE OF HEARING : 20.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.09.2017 ORDER PER BENCH : BOTH THE ABOVE APPEALS FILED BY SAME ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF LEARNED COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5, LUDHIANA DATED 22.4.2016 AN D 18.1.2017 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2012-13 AND 2013- 14 RESPECTIVELY. 2. THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FIXED FOR HEARIN G ON 16.11.2016 (ITA NO.793/CHD/2016) AND 24.5.2017 (ITA NO.553/CHD/2017) AND WERE ADJOURNED TO VARIOUS DATE S ON ALL OCCASIONS EXCEPT ONE AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. BOTH THE CASES WERE FINALLY ADJOURNED FOR HEARING ON 20.9.2017, HOWEVER, ON THE APPOINTED 2 DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 20.9.2017, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INT ERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEALS AND THE INSTANT APPEALS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACH ARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGE S 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE F OR NON- PROSECUTION. WE MAY ADD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIB ERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THE ORDER IN CASE IT IS SERIOU S IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 3