AMBITIOUS COMPUTECH (MUMBAI) PVT.LTD., MUMBAI V. C.I.T., MUMBAI

ITA 6607/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1919 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRM GAUR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI R.V. EASWAR, SENIOR VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. I.T.A. NO. 6 607/MUM/2008. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06. AMBITIOUS COMPUTECH (MUMBAI) D Y. COMMISSIONER OF PVT. LTD., D/504, SRI SAI SHILP, V S. INCOME TAX, NEAR GANAPADA FIRE STATION,GANPADA, C IRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI. MULUND EAST, MUMBAI 400081. PAN AADCA3311J. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRM GAUR. O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, MUMBAI D ATED 05-08-2008. 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF FIVE DAYS IN FILING THE APP EAL AND NO PETITION IS FILED REQUESTING FOR CONDONATION OF DEL AY. 3. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 05-10-2009. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THAT DAT E. THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 25-11-2009 FOR WHICH A NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY RPAD. THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION ON THAT AND HENCE THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 03-02-2010. NOBODY APPEARE D ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON 03-02-2010 AND THE APPEAL WAS FI XED FOR HEARING ON 20-04-2010 BY ISSUING THE NOTICE BY RPAD . ON 2 APPOINTED DATE I.E. 20-04-2010, THERE IS NO COMPLIA NCE NOR THERE IS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT BY THE ASSESSEE. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND T HE DECISION OF MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD WE ALSO TAKE SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION OF JUDGMENT OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS, CENTRAL E XCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009, ORDER DATED 17 TH SEPT., 2009 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT EVERY COURT OR TRIBUNAL HAS AN INHERE NT POWER TO DISMISS THE PROCEEDING FOR NON PROSECUTION WHEN THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT BEFORE IT DOES NOT WISH TO PRO SECUTE THE PROCEEDING. APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2010. SD/- SD/- (R.V. EASWAR) (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) SENIOR VICE-PRESIDENT. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MUMBAI, DATED : 30 TH APRIL, 2010. WAKODE 3 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, A-BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI.