NETVISTA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO (ITO) RG 2(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6095/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 56120 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REENA JHA TRIPATHI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN(J.M) & SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (A.M) ITA NO.6095/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) NETVISTA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, NEW HARI LEELA HOUSE, 5 TH FLOOR, 28/32, MINT ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI 400 001. PAN:AAACN 9995N (APPELLANT) VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANGE 2(2)(3), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. REENA JHA TRIPATHI DATE OF HEARING : 29/12/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/1 2/2011 ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, J.M, THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 2/6/2010 OF CIT(A)-5, MUMBAI RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-0 5. 2. THE NOTICE OF HEARING DATED 8/11/2011 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 29/12/2011. THE NOTICE HAS DULY BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 14/11/2011, AS PER ACKNOW LEDGEMENT ON RECORD. HOWEVER, ON THE DATE OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE NO ADJOURNMENT PETITION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE WAS ALSO FILED. THE ABOVE CONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT IT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL FILED BY IT. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL REPORTED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPL AN INDIA (P) LTD.38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADES H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE ITA NO.6095/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) 2 OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 IT R 480 (M.P) THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. HOW EVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATION CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON-APPEARANCE ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THE TRIBUNAL AT ITS DISCRETI ON MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH E 29 TH DAY OF DEC. 2011. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR ) (N.V.VASUDEVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED. 29 TH DEC.2011 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE CIT CITY CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 5. THE D.RB BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, I TAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI. VM. ITA NO.6095/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) 3 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 29/12/2011 SR.PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 29/12/2011 SR.PS/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 THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER