Shshank Sagar Siddam, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 706/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3549 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2019
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATYA PINISETTY
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHANA RAO
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 706/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SHASHANK SAGAR SIDDAM, HYDERABAD [PAN: BKKPS8874H] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) STAY APPLICATION NO. 32/HYD/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 706/HYD/2018) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHASHANK SAGAR SIDDAM, HYDERABAD [PAN: BKKPS8874H] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI P. MURALI MOHANA RAO, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI SATYA PINISETTY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 22-02-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-02-2019 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. : THOUGH ONLY THE STAY APPLICATION IS FIXED FOR HEARI NG TO-DAY I.E., ON 22-02-2019, WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH THE PARTIES, THE APPEAL ITSELF IS TAKEN FOR HEARING AND IS DISPOSED-OF AS UNDER: THIS IS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH THE ASSES SEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS)-6, HYDERABAD, DATED 26-01-2018, DISMISSIN G THE ITA. NO. 706/HYD/2018 SA NO. 32/HYD/2019 :- 2 -: APPEAL FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE LAST DAY OF HEARING. 2. IT IS STATED BY THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSMENT WA S COMPLETED U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT [ ACT] BUT BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAD APPEARED AND SOUGH T ADJOURNMENT ON TWO OCCASIONS AND ON THE THIRD OCCASI ON, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PRESENT AND THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THE LD.DR SUPPORTED THE O RDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIN D THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR NO N- PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL BY APPLYING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 IT D 320) AND HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480). HOWEVER, WE FIND THA T THE CIT(A) HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION. HE OUGHT TO HAVE DISPOSED-OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THEREFORE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO DISP OSE-OF THE SAME ON MERITS. SINCE THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED-O F, THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BECOME INFR UCTUOUS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS REJECTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND OF FEBRUARY, 2019 SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) VICE-PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED 22 ND OF FEBRUARY, 2019 TNMM ITA. NO. 706/HYD/2018 SA NO. 32/HYD/2019 :- 3 -: COPY TO : 1. SHASHANK SAGAR SIDDAM, C/O. P. MURALI & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 6-3-655/2/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(APPEALS)-6, HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT-6, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.