Cane Development Council, Titawi, Gorakhpur V. JCIT, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 6503/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6703 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 25-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-II : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6503/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, TITAWI, C/O DS KOHLI, ADVOCATE, F-06, 1 ST FLOOR, NARAYAN TOWER, GANDHI LANE, GOLGHAR, GORAKHPUR. PAN : AAALC0173E VS. JCIT, RANGE-1, MUZAFFARNAGAR. ITA NO.6540/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, ROHANAKALAN, C/O DS KOHLI, ADVOCATE, F-06, 1 ST FLOOR, NARAYAN TOWER, GANDHI LANE, GOLGHAR, GORAKHPUR. PAN : AAALC0277F VS JCIT, RANGE-1, MUZAFFARNAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI F.R. MEENA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.10.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25.10.2016 ITA NOS.6503 & 6540/DEL/2014 2 ORDER THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 01.08.2014 IN RELATION TO A SSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TOD AY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEES HAVE NOT F ILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIONS ALSO. THE NOTICES OF HEARING SENT TO T HE ASSESSEES TO THE ADDRESSES GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36 HAVE NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT T HE ASSESSEES ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THEIR APPEALS. THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PRO SECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461, WHE REIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 4 80 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT, THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLO WING OBSERVATION:- ITA NOS.6503 & 6540/DEL/2014 3 IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P. ) LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DEL.),WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE O F HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS , TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW O F THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) R ULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 5 TH OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 25 TH OCTOBER, 2016. DK ITA NOS.6503 & 6540/DEL/2014 4 COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI