Vinod Kumar Pitti, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-4(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 63/HYD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2428 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN MALIK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 63/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 VINOD KUMAR PITTI, HYDERABAD [PAN: ACHPP3965C] VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : NONE FOR REVENUE : SMT. SUMAN MALIK, DR DATE OF HEARING : 21-03-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21-03-2018 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, HYDERABAD, DATED 22-09-2016 FOR THE AY. 2007-08. 2. INITIALLY, THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 02 -08-2017 AND SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, THE C ASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 21-11-2017, FOR WHICH NOTICE ISSUED THRO UGH RPAD. AGAIN ON 21-11-2017, ON THE REASON THAT AR IS N OT FEELING WELL, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 21-03-2018, W HICH WAS INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT. AGAIN ON 21-03-2018, A T THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE NOR THERE WAS I.T.A. NO. 63/HYD/2017 :- 2 - : ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. THEREFORE , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS AP PEAL. 3. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN T HE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., [118 ITR 461 ] THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF A PPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSE SSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHE RENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HEL D BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEM IPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THE REFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADE SH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR [223 ITR 480], WE DISM ISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO SEEK RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY WAY OF FILING A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, SHOWING SUFFICIENT REASONS, WHICH PREVENTED HIM FOR ABSENCE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST MARCH, 2018 SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (V. DUR GA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 21 ST MARCH, 2018 TNMM I.T.A. NO. 63/HYD/2017 :- 3 - : COPY TO : 1. SHRI VINOD KUMAR PITTI, C/O. BRIJ GOPAL GILADA & CO., 5-9-191, 302, 3 RD FLOOR, BRINDAVAN COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, CHIRAG ALI LANE, ABIDS, HYDERABAD. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-1, HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT-1, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.