M/s Ratnagiri Impex Private Limited, Bangalore V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 625/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 62521114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DHIVAHAR JT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.625/BANG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. RATNAGIRI IMPEX PRIVATE LTD., ANNAPURNA HOUSE, NO.1/1G, NEW GUDDADAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 560 026. PAN: AABCR 5888B VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 12(4), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. DHIVAHAR, JT. CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 02.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.06.2015 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.1.2014 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-III, BANGALORE RELATING TO ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2006-07. ITA NO. 625/BANG/2014 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THERE WERE CERTAIN DEFECTS IN THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS BROUGHT TO THE ASSESSEES NOTICE BY THE R EGISTRY BY ITS COMMUNICATION DATED 8.5.2014. THE DEFECT WAS NOT R ECTIFIED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 2.2. 2015. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, BUT NONE A PPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS F ILED BY ONE H.R. SURESH & CO., CAS. THE CAS, HOWEVER, DID NOT FILE THE POWER OF ATTORNEY ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 2.6.2015. ON 2.6.2015, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. A LETTER WAS, HOWEVER, FILED BY ONE H.R. SURESH & CO., CAS, SEEKI NG ADJOURNMENT. AS ALREADY STATED, THE CAS WHO FILED THE APPLICATION F OR ADJOURNMENT HAS NOT FILED ANY POWER OF ATTORNEY FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL) WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFE RENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ITA NO. 625/BANG/2014 PAGE 3 OF 4 4. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE M EMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 5. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATION CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON- APPEARANCE ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THE TRIBUNAL, AT ITS DISCRETION, MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 ND DAY OF JUNE, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ) ( N.V. VASU DEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 2 ND JUNE, 2015. /D S/ ITA NO. 625/BANG/2014 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENTS 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.