M/s Modella Knitwears Ltd., Chandigarh V. DCIT, Chandigarh

ITA 878/CHANDI/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8724 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 1995-1996
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 878/CHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96 M/S MODELLA KNITWEARS LTD., V THE DCIT, SCO 44, SECTOR 17-E, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AABCM5744P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 21.01.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.01.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), CHANDIGARH DATED 19.08.2008 FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 1995-96. 2. THE RECORD REVEALED THAT EARLIER THIS APPEAL WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION ON 12.01.2009 AND THE ASSESSEE FILED MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RECALLING THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS ALLOW ED AND THE APPEAL WAS AGAIN FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23.09.2009. A FTER THAT, THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN ADJOURNED MANY TIMES. 3. ON 10.11.2014, THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 21.01 .2015 BUT AGAIN DESPITE ISSUE OF NOTICE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RE CEIVED. IT, 2 THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERES TED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECI SION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 46L [RELEVANT PAGES 47 7 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO: I) CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD: 38 ITD 320 (DE L) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT: 223 ITR 480(MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS [SUPRA], WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST JANUARY,2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST JANUARY,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH