ALKA BROKING LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5755/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 575519914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K B MENON

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5755/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) ALKA BROKING LIMITED, MAITRI, PLOT NO.10, NUTAN LAXMI CHS LTD., N.S. ROAD NO.10, J.V.P.D. VILLE PARLE (WEST), MUMBAI -400 049 ...... APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER -4(1)(1), ROOM NO.636, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI -400 020 ..... RESPONDENT PAN:AAECA055B APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI P.K.B. MENON DATE OF HEARING: 20.12.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20.12.2011 O R D E R PER R.S. PADVEKAR , JM : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-8, MUMBAI DATED 16.04.2010 FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR THE HEARING THE LD. D.R. FOR THE DEPARTMENT SHRI P.K.B. MENON WAS PRESENT. NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE RECORD, IT IS SEEN THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS BEEN SERVED WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING AND THIS APPEAL W AS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 17.10.2001 AND ON THE SAID DATE THE ASSESSEE SOU GHT THE ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS GRANTED BY THE BENCH AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 20.12.2011. ON 20.12.2011 THE ASSESSE E HAS SHOWN NO INTEREST IN REMAINING PRESENT NOR ANY APPLICATION F OR ADJOURNMENT IS ITA 5755/M/2010 ALKA BROKING LIMITED 2 FILED. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANO THER, (1979) 118 ITR 461 THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE MEMO OR APPEAL BUT SAME M UST BE EFFECTIVELY PURSUED. A RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT I NTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. AS THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERE STED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL THE SAME IS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 2 0 TH DECEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- ( P.M. JAGTAP ) ACCOUTANT MEMBER ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 20 TH DECEMBER, 2011 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A)-8, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT-4, MUMBAI. 5) THE D.R. A BENCH, MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI *CHAVAN ITA 5755/M/2010 ALKA BROKING LIMITED 3 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 20.12.2011 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 20.12.2011 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER