POONAM ARYA, MUMBAI V. ACIT CEN CIR 42, MUMBAI

ITA 7969/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1892 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A C TEJPAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH C BENCH BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.7969/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 POONAM ARYA, 2-D, VICEROY PARK, TOWER B, THAKUR COMPLEX, KANDIVALI(E), MUMBAI-400001 PA NO.AMJPA 8879 Q ACIT, CENT. CIRCLE-42, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI A.C.TEJPAL DATE OF HEARING: 30.1.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 1 .2.2013 ORDER PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08 AGAINST ORDER DATED 30.8.2011 OF LD CIT(A) -38, MUMBAI.. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE HEARING WAS LAST FIXED ON 7.1 1.2012. AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEES COUNSEL VIDE LETTER DATED 6.11.2012, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 30.1.2013 AND THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT. H OWEVER, ON 31.1.2013 , WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, NO ONE APPEARED O N BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. THERE WAS ALSO NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. FROM THE ABOVE , IT IS INFERRED THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N.BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 460, WHEREI N, THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT . WE ITA NO.7969/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 2 ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P)LTD., 38 ITD 320(DEL). 3. IN VIEW OF ABOVE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE PROVIS IONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIA BLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST FEBRUARY, 2013 SD/- (B.RAMAKOTAIAH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (B.R. MITTAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 1 ST FEBRUARY, 2013 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),38, MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-IV, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH C MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI