Gholap Babanrao S, Nashik V. Dy. Comm. of Income-tax, Nashik

ITA 568/PUN/2007

• Counselvise Citation: 56824514 RSA 2007
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K OJHA

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.568 AND 569/PN/2007 (ASSTT.YEARS : 1996-97 AND 1997-98) GHOLAP BABANRAO S. (HUF) 19/20, SHIV SAPURTI, LAM ROAD, VIHITGAON, DEOLALI CAMP, NASHIK. GIR NO. G-51 .. APPELLANT VS. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), NASHIK .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SRI K.K. OJHA DATE OF HEARING : 04-06-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04-06-2013 ORDER PER R.K.PANDA, AM : THE ABOVE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DI RECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER DATED 29-12-2006 OF THE CIT(A)-I, NASH IK RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97 AND 1997-98. 2. THE ABOVE CASES WERE FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 07-08-2008 AND THEY WERE GETTING ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME. THE COUN SEL OF THE ASSESSEE DR.SUNIL PATHAK FILED AN APPLICATION INTIMATING WITHDRAWAL O F LETTER OF AUTHORITY ON 18- 03-2013. THE CASES WERE THEREFORE ADJOURNED TO 04- 06-2013 AND NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD INTIMATING HIM REGAR DING THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING ON 04-06-2013. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLIC ATION REQUESTING ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE ON THE GROUND THAT HE HAD A LREADY SENT THE PAPERS BY COURIER AND HAD APPOINTED DR. SUNIL PATHAK TO REPRE SENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE 2 TRIBUNAL. WHEN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED DR. SUNIL PATHAK WHO WAS PRESENT IN THE COURT ROOM STATED THAT HE HAS ALREAD Y WITHDRAWN FROM THE CASE AND HE IS NO LONGER THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE O F THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TRIED TO GET ADJOURNMENT BY MISLEADING THE BENCH AND IS ADOPTING DILATORY TA CTICS TO PROLONG THE HEARING OF THE CASE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE A PPEALS FILED BY HIM. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTI PLAN INDIA PVT. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND THE DEC ISION OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT REPORTED IN 213 ITR 480 WE DISMISS THE APPEALS AS UNADMITTED. HOWE VER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATION CAN SATISFY THE BENCH FO R NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY AT ITS DISCRETION RECALL THE ORDER. 3. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF, I.E. ON 4 TH JUNE, 2013. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOU NTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED THE 4TH JUNE 2013 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-I, NASHIK 4. THE CIT-I, NASHIK 5. D.R. B BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE 3