Shri Chandrakant Mango Chirmade, Jalgaon V. Asstt.CIT, Cir.1, Jalgaon, Jalgaon

ITA 87/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66886 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH VERMA; ANN KAPTHUAMA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.87/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) CHANDRAKANT MANGO CHIRMADE C/O SHANTI INDUSTRIES K 19, M.I.D.C., JALGAON 425 003 PAN : AAMPC0274E . APPELLANT VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, JALGAON . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MR. MUKESH VERMA & MS. ANN KAPTHUAMA DATE OF HEARING : 29-04-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-04-2013 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-II, NASHIK DAT ED 04.10.2011 WHICH, IN TURN, HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 16.12.2009 PAS SED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. IN THIS CASE, INITIALLY THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED FI XING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 15-03-2013, ON WHICH DATE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.04.2013. HOWEVER, ON 29-04-2013, NEITHER ASSESSEE ATTENDED N OR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECU TING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE C ASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY ITA NO.87/PN/2012 CHANDRAKANT MANGO CHIRMADE A.Y. 2007-08 FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFEC TIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPE AL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE A PPEAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION, AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBA I IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL N O. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE COURTS A ND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPL AN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITH LIBERTY TO MOVE APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER AFTER SHOWING THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING I N TERMS OF RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH APRIL, 2013. SD/- SD/- (G. S. PANNU) (S HAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER PUNE, DATED: 29.04.2013 SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-II, NASHIK; 4) THE CIT, NASHIK; 5) THE DR, A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PUNE