M/s. Kemrock Industries & Exports Ltd., Baroda V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-1(2), Baroda

ITA 609/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1686 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 09-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 609 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 7 - 08 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND RAJPAL YADAV JM ] I.T.A. NO. 609 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 200 7 - 08 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORTS LTD. .... .......... .APPELLANT AT VILLAGE ASOJ, VADODARA - HALOL EXPRESS WAY, TA. WAGHODIA, DIST. VADODARA - 391 510 . [PAN: AA ACK 8810 B ] VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2), BARODA. ............. . RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE , FOR THE APPELLA NT MUKESH SHARMA, FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : MAY 16 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MAY 16 TH , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - I, BARODA DATED 0 5.12.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 7 - 08 . 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ACKN OWLEDGEMENT SLIP AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE ITS CASE. HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEA L MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HON BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY I.T.A. NO . 609 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 7 - 08 PAGE 2 OF 2 THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENC H IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COUR T TODAY ON THE 16 TH DAY OF MAY , 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - RAJPAL YADAV PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 16 TH DAY OF MAY , 2016. COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD