M/s PGF Limited, Chandigarh V. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

ITA 641/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5105 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.641 TO 649/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1997-98 TO 2005-06) M/S PGF LIMITED, VS. THE A.C.I.T.(TDS), SCO 1042-43, CHANDIGARH. SECTOR 22-B, CHANDIGARH. PAN: AABCP2805N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 08.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.06.2017 O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS BUNCH OF NINE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF LD.CIT(APPEALS)-I, CHANDIGARH DATED 22.12.2015 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 1997-98 TO 2005-06. 2. THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FIXED FOR HEARING FOR TODAY I.E. 8.6.2017, FOR WHICH DATE NOT ICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER A DEFECT NOTICE WAS ALSO SENT, POINTING OUT VARIOUS DEFECTS IN THE APPEAL FILED. ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 8.6.2017, HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVE D FOR ADJOURNMENT. ALSO WE FIND THAT THE DEFECTS POI NTED OUT HAVE NOT BEEN REMOVED. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSES SEE IS 2 NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEALS AND THE INST ANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISM ISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B .N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), W E DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE F OR NON- PROSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JUNE, 2017. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 8 TH JUNE, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH