Dong-A India Automotive Pvt Limited, Kancheepuram V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 83/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7781 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH IRS
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! , '!# BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NOS.83 & 84/MDS/2016 ' $ %$ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 & 2009-2010 DONG-A INDIA AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD OLD NO. 10 (NEW NO.55) THANDALAM VILLAGE, SRIPERUMBUDUR TALUK, KANCHIPURAM DIST 602 105. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(4) CHENNAI. [PAN AABCD 4973B] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) &' ( ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE *+&' ( ) /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. A.V. SREEKANTH, IRS, JCIT. ( , / DATE OF HEARING : 08-03-2016 -.% ( , / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09-03-2016 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-1, CHENNAI DT 15.09.2015 FOR THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEAR S PASSED ITA NO.83 & 84/MDS/2016. :- 2 -: U/S.271BA AND 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (H EREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, WE FOUND THAT NOTICE DATED 18.01.2016 WAS SENT BY RPAD AND SERVED ON THE ASSES SEE ON 11.02.2016 EVIDENT FROM THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PLACED ON RECORD. DESPITE NOTICE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NON E APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASS ESSEE IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING TH E APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS HELD BY I.T .A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LIMITED 38 ITD 320 THAT THERE MAY BE VARIOUS REASONS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN A BSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT BE ABSENCE TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL AND ALSO FOLLOWING DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINA TE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF HELIOS AND MATHESON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LIMITED VS ITO IN ITA NO.134/MDS/2011, DATED 05.07. 2011, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. HOWEVER, WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE A PETITION TO RECALL THIS ORDER PROVIDED CONVINCING/SUFFICIENT CAUSE BE EXPLAINED FOR NON AP PEARANCE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING. ITA NO.83 & 84/MDS/2016. :- 3 -: . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.83 & 84/MDS/2016 ARE DISMISSED 4. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 09 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . ! ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI / / DATED: 09.03.2016 KV 0 ( *',12 32%, / COPY TO: 1 . &' / APPELLANT 3. 4, () / CIT(A) 5. 278 *',' / DR 2. *+&' / RESPONDENT 4. 4, / CIT 6. 89$ : / GF