JAGNANDAN SINGH & PARTY, MUMBAI V. ACIT 15(2), MUMBAI

ITA 8390/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3523 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH, MUMBAI . , , !' !' !' !' #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& , ,, , ' ' ' ' ( ( ( ( BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NO. 8390/MUM./2011 ( '* + ',+ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200506 ) M/S. JAGNANDAN SINGH & PARTY C/O M/S. BLUE STAR WINES OPP. SANTA CRUZ POLICE STATION JUHU ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W) MUMBAI 400 054 .. -. / APPELLANT * V/S ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE15(2), MUMBAI .... /0-. / RESPONDENT - . / PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AAAAJ2219H '* +2$ 3 4 / REVENUE BY : NONE ' 3 4 / ASSESSEE BY : MR. MOHIT JAIN *' 3 $ / DATE OF HEARING 19.06.2013 % 5, 3 $ / DATE OF ORDER 19.06.2013 % % % % / ORDER #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& , ,, , ' ' ' ' 6 6 6 6 / PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE CHA LLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 2 ND SEPTEMBER 2013, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)XXVI, MUMBAI, FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 200506. THE SOLE DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO CONFIRMA TION OF PENALTY OF ` 5,04,238, LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE M/S. JAGNANDAN SINGH & PARTY 2 ACT ) BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). 2. WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NEITHER THE A SSESSEE NOR ANY OF ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES APPEARED BEFORE US. THERE IS NO APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT EITHER. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANC ES, WE COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN P ROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. 3. THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN M/S. CHEMI POL V/S UNION OF INDIA & ORS., IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.62 OF 200 9, VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 17 TH SEPTEMBER 2009, WHILE CONSIDERING THE JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT V/S S. CHENIAPPA MUDALIAR, AIR 1969 SC 1068, SUNDERLAL MANNALAL V/S NANDRAMDAS DWARKADAS, AIR 1958 MP 260, AND OTHER JUDGMENTS, OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS:- 6. WE CANNOT ALTOGETHER LOSE SIGHT OF THE RULE THAT EVERY COURT OR TRIBUNAL HAS AN INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS A PROC EEDING FOR NON- PROSECUTION WHEN THE PETITION / APPELLANT BEFORE IT DOES NOT WISH TO PROSECUTE THE PROCEEDINGS. IN SUCH A SITUATION, UNL ESS THE STATUTE CLEARLY REQUIRES THE COURT OR TRIBUNAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL / PROCEEDING AND DECIDE IT ON MERITS, IT CAN DISMISS THE APPEAL / PROCEEDING FOR. THE DELHI BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CIT V/S M/S. MU LTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), HAS HELD THAT IN A S IMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL MAY BE DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 4. APPLYING THE AFORESAID PROPOSITIONS LAID DOWN BY TH E HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE DECISION O F THE TRIBUNAL CITED SUPRA, WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND HOLD THE SAM E AS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 5. 2 $7 '* +2$ 3 2 * $ 89 : 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS D ISMISSED. % 3 5, ; <*7 19 TH JUNE 2013 3 = : ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH JUNE 2013 SD/- . .. . B. RAMAKOTAIAH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- #$ #$ #$ #$ %& %& %& %& ' ' ' ' AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, <* <* <* <* DATED : 19 TH JUNE 2013 M/S. JAGNANDAN SINGH & PARTY 3 % 3 /'$#> ?>,$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) '* +2$ / THE ASSESSEE; (2) ' / THE REVENUE; (3) @ () / THE CIT(A); (4) @ / THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) >'C= /'$'* , , / THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) =D+ E / GUARD FILE. 0>$ /'$ / TRUE COPY %* / BY ORDER / . FG / PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY '2H '* F' / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I / 8 / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI