P Sashikiran Goud, Hyderabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kurnool

ITA 57/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 5722514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJAT MITRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.57/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 MR. P. SASHIKIRAN GOUD KURNOOL PAN ACFPP9921M VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 KURNOOL (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : -NONE- FOR REVENUE : MR. RAJAT MITRA DATE OF HEARING : 15.10.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.10.2014 ORDER PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY CIT(A) IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A)-IV, HYDERABAD DATED 26.12.2012 FOR TH E A.Y. 2007-08 2. THE APPEAL WAS POSTED NUMBER OF TIMES FROM 15.02.2013 TO 17.02.2014. THE COUNSEL M/S. VENUGOPA L & CHENOY HAVE APPEARED ON 27.06.2013, 21.10.2013 AND 17.02.2014 AND SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS ON VARIOUS REASO NS. HOWEVER, ON 05.06.2014 THEY WITHDREW THE POWER OF A TTORNEY FILED ON THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN IN T OUCH WITH THEM AND THEIR CONTINUOUS REMINDERS DID NOT RESULT ANY RESPONSE FROM ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE CASE COULD N OT BE HEARD ON 05.06.2014 AND NOTICE THROUGH RPAD WAS ISSUED PO STING THE CASE ON 15.10.2014. THE NOTICE HOWEVER, RETURNE D UN- SERVED AND PRESENT WHEREABOUTS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALSO NOT 2 ITA.NO.57/HYD/2013 MR. P. SASHIKIRAN GOUD, KURNOOL. AVAILABLE. IN VIEW OF THIS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION T HAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. 3. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER(S C) SUPREME COURT DECISION DT,04-05-1979, 118 ITR 461 (SC) AT PAGES 477/478 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN FILING MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES W HERE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWERS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSE CUTION AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPE AL NO. 62 OF 2009. 4. HENCE FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., REPOR TED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL), AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TU KOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480 (MP), AND F URTHER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DATED 17. 09.2010 IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009, WE DISMISS THIS APPEA L AS UN- ADMITTED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION BY THE ASSESSEE. H OWEVER, ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO SEEK RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY WAY OF FILING A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION SHOWING SUFFICIENT REAS ONS WHICH PREVENTED HIM FOR ABSENCE ON THE SAID OF DATE OF HE ARING OF THIS APPEAL. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.10.2014. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 15 TH OCTOBER, 2014 VBP/- 3 ITA.NO.57/HYD/2013 MR. P. SASHIKIRAN GOUD, KURNOOL. COPY TO 1. MR. P. SASHIKIRAN GOUD, FLAT NO.101, SWAPNALOK APARTMENTS, N.R. PET, KURNOOL. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURNOOL 3. CIT(A)-IV, HYDERABAD 4. CIT-III, HYDERABAD 5. D.R. ITAT B BENCH, HYDERABAD.