Shri Suresh Shankarprasad Gupta, Mumbai V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Daman

ITA 811/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2108 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R P RASTOGI

Judgement Text

SHRI SURESH SHANKERPRASAD GUPTA ITA NO.811 OF 2016 PAGE 1 OF 2 , , INCOM TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALSURAT-BENCH-SURAT . . , . . , BEFORE SHRI C .M. GARG,JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O. P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.811/AHD/2016/SRT ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 SHRI SURESH SHANK E RPRASAD GUPTA, 8-C/501, ALICA NAGAR, LOKHANDWALA TOWNSHIP, KANDIVALI (E), MUMBAI 400 101. PAN: APVPG 8529A V S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (4), DAMAN APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY NONE. /RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.P.RASTOGI , SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING: 17 .0 4 .2018 /PRONOUNCEMENT DATE 17 .04 .2018 ORDER PER O. P. MEENA, AM 1. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD DATED 29.01.2016. 2. DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, NOBODY IS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE LD.DR IS PRESENT FOR THE REVENUE. 3. THE HEARING OF APPEAL WAS FIXED ON 17.04.2018, BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR WAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE KEPT PENDING ADJUDICATION FOR INDEFINITE PERIOD. IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS FOR EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION ON THE APPOINTED DATE. MERE FILING OF APPEAL IS NOT ENOUGH RATHER IT REQUIRES EFFECTIVE PERSUASION ALSO. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEALS OF THE SHRI SURESH SHANKERPRASAD GUPTA ITA NO.811 OF 2016 PAGE 2 OF 2 ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE FOR DISMISSAL IN THE LIGHT OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N.BHATTACHARJEE & OTHERS 118 ITR 46 (SC), WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIP HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. FURTHER, THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THEIR LORDSHIP OBSERVE AS THAT IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE . FURTHER, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON DATE, HENCE, ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, THE TRIBUNAL TREATED THE APPEAL; FILED BY THE REVENUE; AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.04.2018 SD/- SD/- ( . . /C.M. GARG) ( . . / O.P.MEENA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / SURAT, DATED: 17 TH APRIL , 2018 S.GANGADHARA RAO COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SURAT