Urmiladevi H.Giri, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 735/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 73520514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RK GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

ITA NO .735 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 2 - 03 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S.S. GODARA JM] ITA NO. 735 / AHD / 2 0 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 2 - 03 URMILADEVI H. GIRI , ....... .. . ..... APPELLANT C/O. ANMOL FAB, GOSWAMI BHAVAN, SASHP URI SOCIETY, SAINAGAR, VATVA, AHMEDABAD. [PAN A CVPG 1163 D ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, .... .................. .... .. RESPONDENT WARD 6 (4), AHMEDABAD. APPEARANCES BY: N ONE FOR THE APPELLANT R.K. GUPTA FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEAR ING : OCTOBER 30 TH , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 30 TH , 2015 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - X I , AHMEDABAD DATED 0 3 .0 1 .2012 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 2 - 03 . 2. IT IS N OTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SENT BY REGISTERED POST AS PER THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36 . FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSES SEE IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE ITS CASE. HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT ITA NO .735 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 2 - 03 PAGE 2 OF 2 VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HON BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TU KOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 3 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH D AY OF OCTOB ER , 2015. SD/ - SD/ - S.S. GODARA PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD , THE 30 TH DAY OF OCTOBER , 201 5 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) T HE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD