Orchid Pharma Limited, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 73/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5786 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS RU GEORGE
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU R L REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I T.A. NO. 73 /MDS/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 1 3 M/S. ORCHID PHARMA LTD., [FORMERLY ORCHID CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.), ORCHID TOWERS, 313, VALLUVARKOTTAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI 600 03 4 . [PAN: A AACO 0402B ] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE 5( 1 ) , CHENNAI 600 034 . ( APPELLANT ) ( R ESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : MRS. RUBY GEORGE, CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 1 4 . 11 .201 7 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 27 .11 .201 7 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL 2, BENGALUR U AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(1) OF THE INCOME TAX A C T, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT] . 2. THE APPEAL WAS INITIALLY POSTED FOR HEARING ON 28.02.2017 AND NOTICE ISSUED WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS I.T.A. NO. 73 /M /17 2 ADJOURNED TO 20.04.2017 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL. SIMILARLY, THE HEARINGS WERE ADJOURNED TO 20.06.2017, 29.08.2017 AND 14.11.2017 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL AND HAVING NOTED THE DATE OF HEARING, HE HAS ENDORSED IN THE ORDER SHEET. HOWE VER, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 14.11.2017, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, DEFECTS FOUND IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOTIFIED IN THE DEFECT MEMO , BUT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE RECTIFIED THE DEFECTS NOTIFIED BY THE TRIBUNAL NOR PUT HIS APPEARANCE ON THE DAY OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. HENCE, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3 . THEREFORE, HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 27 TH NOVEMBER , 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, 27 . 1 1 .201 7 VM/ - I.T.A. NO. 73 /M /17 3 / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.