BHARAT SEVASHRAM TRUST, Mirzapur V. CIT (EXEMPTION), Lucknow

ITA 57/ALLD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5028 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MADHUK
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 57/ALLD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 BHARAT SEVASHRAM TRUST VILL. PIPRASAND MEWLI SADAR MIRZAPUR V. CIT (EXEMPTION) LUCKNOW TAN/PAN: AACTB1895J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S. K. MADHUK, CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 21 11 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22 11 201 9 O R D E R PER A. D. JAIN, V.P.: THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW, DATED 28/1/2016, PASSED UNDER SECTION 12AA(1)(B)(III) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 21/11/2019, BUT NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE THROUGH RPAD, WHICH HAS BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK NO ASHRAM IN THIS NAME EXISTS IN PIPRASAND, HENCE REQUEST TO PROVIDE THE MOBILE NUMBER. THE REGISTRY IS RETURNED TO THE SENDER. THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM NO.36. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. AS SUCH, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD, WE PLACE RELIANCE UPON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS:- ITA NO.57/ALLD/2017 PAGE 2 OF 2 1. CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008), 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) 3. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED (SUPRA), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE MAY, HOWEVER, GET IT REVIVED BY SHOWING SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/11/2019. SD/ - SD/ - [ T. S. KAPOOR ] [ A. D. JAIN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED:22/11/2019 JJ:2111 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR