ETERNAL DREAMS ENTERTAINMENT (I) P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ADDL CIT RG 19(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5763/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1336 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 29-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADEEP HEDAOO
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 5763/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI I BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE, SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO. 5763/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 DATE OF HEARING : 23.6.2010 M/S. ETERNAL DREAMS ENTERTAINMENT ...... APPELLANT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 23/603, MHADA, OSHIWARA LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (WEST MUMBAI 400 053 AABCE0552B VS. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .. RESP ONDENT RANGE 8(1), MUMBAI APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRADEEP HEDAOO O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENG ED CORRECTNESS OF ORDER DATED 12 TH AUGUST 2009. PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)VII, MUMBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. ITA NO. 5763/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE GRIEVANCES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE AS FOLLO WS:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR LEVY OF PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,71,402/- UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) WITHOUT APPRE CIATING THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APP ELLANT HAS NEITHER FURNISHED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME NOR CONCEALED ANY PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THEREFORE, CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 2,71,402/- U/S 271(1)(C) IS UNJUSTIFIED AND THE SAME MAY BE DE LETED. 3. WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NEITHER THE A SSESSEE NOR ANY OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFO RE US TO ARGUE THE APPEAL. EVEN THERE IS NO INTIMATION IN THE FILE REG ARDING NON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND/OR ITS AUTHORIZED R EPRESENTATIVE. IT SEEMS THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED TO PROSECU TE ITS APPEAL. HENCE, NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN KEEPING THE MA TTER ALIVE. WE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF T HE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, IN THE CASE OF M/S. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. L TD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UN-ADMITTED AND HOLD THE SAME AS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE AS SUCH. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRON OUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF JUNE 2010. SD/XX SD/XX (N.V. VASUDEVAN) (PRAMOD KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 25 TH DAY OF JUNE 2010. ITA NO. 5763/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 PAGE 3 OF 4 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) , MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I BENCH, ITAT, MUMB AI 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI ITA NO. 5763/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 PAGE 4 OF 4 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 23.6.2010 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 23.6.2010 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 23.6.2010 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 23.6.2010 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 23.6.2010 SR.PS/PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25.6.2010 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER