M/s. Cane Development Council, Shamli, Uttar Pradesh V. JCIT, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 6479/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3325 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 ITA.NO.6479/DEL/2014 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, SHAM ILI IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES B : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.6479/DEL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, SHAMLI. C/O. D.S. KOHLI, ADVOCATE, F-06, 1 ST FLOOR, NARAYAN TOWER GANDHI LANE, GOLGHAR, GORAKHPUR (U.P.) 273001. PAN AAALC0276E VS. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1 MUZAFFARNAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : -NONE- FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAGHUNATH, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.11.2017 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR, DATED 01 ST AUGUST, 2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2010- 2011. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED THE DATE OF HEAR ING OF THE APPEAL TWICE THROUGH REGISTERED POST. HOWEVER, NONE APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT ANY TIME. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT A SSESSEE IS NO MORE 2 ITA.NO.6479/DEL/2014 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, SHAM ILI INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, TH E APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTED. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING THAT OF MULTIPLAN I NDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL.); HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), AND ALSO THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO O F APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED AS UN- ADMITTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (L.P. SAHU) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI, DATED 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2017 VBP/- 3 ITA.NO.6479/DEL/2014 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, SHAM ILI COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R. ITAT B BENCH, DELHI 6. GUARD FILE. //BY ORDER // ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES DELHI.