Chandaka Chinnam Naidu, Vizianagaram V. The ITO, Vizianagaram

ITA 76/VIZ/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6678 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y SESHA SRINIVASA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 7 6 / VIZ /201 7 (ASST. YEAR : 20 11 - 12 ) CHANDAKA CHINNAM NAIDU, THANGUDUBILLI VILLAGE, NELLIMARLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. V S . IT O , WARD - 2 , VIZIANAGARAM . PAN NO. AOIPC 8732 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE . DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI Y. SESHA SRINIVASA - SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 25 / 0 9 /201 7 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 / 0 9 /201 7 . O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 22 / 11 /201 6 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 20 11 - 12 . 2. IN THIS CASE, N OTICE FOR HEARING WAS SENT AND DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 2 8 / 04 /201 7 BY FIXING THE CASE ON 16 /0 5 /2017 . ON THAT DATE , NEITHER ASSESSEE ATTENDED NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. AGAIN NOTICE W AS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY FIXING THE CASE ON 13 /0 6 /2017 AND AGAIN TO 24/07/2017 . ON BOTH THE DATES ALSO , NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AGAIN, IT HAS BEEN POSTED TO 11 /0 9 /2017 AND 25/09/2017 . EVEN TODAY ALSO I.E. ON 25/09 /2017 , NEITHER APPEARED NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT 2 ITA NO. 76/VIZ/2017 ( CHANDAKA CHINNAM NAIDU ) INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 4 61 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 H IGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE COURTS AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND M ADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), I DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH IS 25 TH DAY OF SEP. , 201 7 . S D / - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 25 TH SEPTEMBER , 201 7 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE CHANDAKA CHINNAM NAIDU, THANGUDUBILLI VILLAGE, NELLIMARLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE - ITO, WARD - 2 , VIZIANAGARAM . 3. THE P CIT - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE CIT(A) - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM . 5. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) S R. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VIZAG .