Sun Aluminium Extrusions (Erstwhile Partners), Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-15(1), Hyderabad

ITA 666/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3962 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K J DIVYA
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE S MT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S . RIFAUR RAHMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 666 /HYD/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 08 - 09 SUN ALUMINIUM EXTRUSIONS (ERSTWHILE PARTNERS) HYDERABAD. PAN A BBFS 1541A VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 15(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. K.J. DIVYA DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 - 0 8 - 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 0 - 0 8 - 201 8 O R D E R PER S . RIFAUR RAHMAN, A .M.: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF DATED 2 3 / 0 1 / 201 8 OF CIT(A) 7 , HYDERABAD, FOR AY 20 08 - 09 . 2. WHEN THE APPEAL CAME FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 1 0 /0 8 /2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THE RE IS A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTA NCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. U NION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH 2 ITA NO. 666 /HYD/201 8 SUN ALUMINIUM EXTRUSIONS, HYD. COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. EVEN ON MERITS, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS IN POSSESSION OF LAND WORTH AT RS. 27,00,000/ - AS ON 01/04/2007. HOWEVER, THE SAID LAND WAS REMOVED/DELETED FROM THE SCHEDULE IN THE PREVI OUS YEAR RELEVANT TO AY 2008 - 09. AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE LAND WAS EITHER SOLD OR RIGHTS OVER IT WERE EXTINGUISHED/TRANSFERRED AND THUS, IT ATTRACTS CAPITAL GAINS. HE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM NEITHER MENTIONED ABOUT THE LAND TRANSACTIONS NOR OFFERED ANY CAPITAL GAIN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE AY 2008 - 09. SINCE THE INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR 2007 - 08 RELEVANT TO AY 2008 - 09 HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, AO ISSUED A NOTICE U/S 148 ON 10/ 02/2005 TO THE ASSESSEE CALLING FOR THE RETURN OF INCOME. AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE SAID NOTICE, AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT EX - PARTE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 144 OF THE ACT ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS. 30,92,410/ - BY MAKING AN ADDIT ION OF RS. 27,00,000/ - TOWARDS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO. 4. SINCE, THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A ) ARE UNCONTROVERTED, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT ( A ) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 0 TH AUGUST , 2018. SD/ - SD/ - ( P. MADHAVI DEVI ) (S . RIFAUR RAHMAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 1 0 TH AUGUST , 2 018. KV 3 ITA NO. 666 /HYD/201 8 SUN ALUMINIUM EXTRUSIONS, HYD. COPY TO: - 1) M/S SUN ALUMINIUM EXTRUSION, PLOT NO. 12, IDA, CHERLAPALLY, HYDERABAD. 2) DCIT, CIRCLE 15(1), HYD. 3) CIT(A) 7 , HYDERABAD. 4) PR. CIT 7 , HYD . 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD. 6 ) GUARD FILE