ITO, WD-10(2), KOLKATA, Kolkata V. M/s R. P. Edible Oil Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 588/KOL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4452 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM] I.T.A NO. 588/KOL/200 9 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-0 5 I.T.O., WARD-10(2), -VS.- M/S. R.P.EDIBL E OIL LTD. KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN : AAECS 4337 H] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 26.07.2016. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.07.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.01.2009 OF CIT(A)- XXXII, KOLKATA RELATING TO AY 2004-05. 2. THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE WAS FIXED FOR HEARIN G ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. ON MANY OCCASIONS SUCH AS 27.09.2012, 16.09.2015, 14.01.201 6, 15.03.2016, 19.05.2016, NOTICE WAS DIRECTED TO BE SERVED THROUGH THE DR. THE DEPA RTMENT HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WA S CALLED FOR HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT NOR WAS ANY APPLICATION FOR AN ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT APPEARS TO US THAT THE DEPARTMEN T IS NOT SERIOUS IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LI ABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2 ITA NO.588/KOL/2009 M/S. R.P.EDIBLE OIL LTD. A.YR.2004-05 2 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE REVENUE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANC E ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 26.07.2016. SD/- SD/- [DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI] [ N.V.VASUDEVA N ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 26.07.2016. [RG PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. R.P.EDIBLE OIL LTD., 25B, BLACK BURN LANE, 3 RD FLOOR, ROOM NO.304, KOLKATA- 700012. 2. I.T.O., WARD-10(2), KOLKATA. 3. CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA. 4. CIT-IV, KOLKAT A. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES 3 ITA NO.588/KOL/2009 M/S. R.P.EDIBLE OIL LTD. A.YR.2004-05 3