OCCASSION, MUMBAI V. DCIT 22, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 903/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3591 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 01-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P MEENA; DT OF HEARING TH
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C CC C BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI , ! !! ! . ' '' ' . #$% #$% #$% #$% '& '& '& '& BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE S SS SHRI HRI HRI HRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI N K BILLAIYA, AM & SHRI N K BILLAIYA, AM & SHRI N K BILLAIYA, AM & SHRI N K BILLAIYA, AM ./ I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO.903/MUM/2011 903/MUM/2011 903/MUM/2011 903/MUM/2011 ( ! ! ! ! ' ' ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007-08) OCCASION UNIT NO. 106 DEVJI KESHAVJI INDL ESTATE W T PATIL MARG CHEMBUR MUMBAI 400 071 ! ! ! ! / VS. THE DY COMMR OF INCOME TAX 22 VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI ( '& ./ ) ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABF03176G ( (* / APPELLANT ) .. ( +,(* / RESPONDENT ) (* (* (* (* - - - - ' '' ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE +,(* +,(* +,(* +,(* . .. . - - - - ' '' ' /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O P MEENA ! ! ! ! . .. . /& /& /& /& / DT. OF HEARING : 13 TH MAY 2013 01' ./& 01' ./& 01' ./& 01' ./& /DT.OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 13 TH MAY 2013 '2 / O R D E R PER : , . . / VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATE 11.12.2010 PASSED U/S 263 OF THE IT ACT OF THE CIT FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT T HE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT HAS FILED A REQUEST DATED 9 TH MAY 2013 FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. SINCE THE R EQUEST FILED BY THE CA WAS WITHOUT ANY LETTER OF AUTHORITY ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE; THEREFORE, THE SAME IS REJECTED. THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT HE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL FILED B Y HIM. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE ITA NO. 903/M/2011 . 2 APPEALS AS NOT ADMITTED BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT(223 ITR 480(MP) AND BY THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF C IT VS MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT LTD (38 ITD 320 (DEL). 3 HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATI ON CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEA RING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY AT ITS DISCRETION RECALL THIS ORDER. 4 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSES IS DISM ISSED. 3 /4 ! 3/ . 5 &3 . / 6$ ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 1 3 TH MAY 2013 . '2 . 01' &' 5 7!4 13 TH $ 1 . 8 SD/- SD/- ( ! . ' . #$% ) '& ( N K BILLAOYA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (VIJAY PAL RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 13 TH MAY 2013 RAJ* ITA NO. 903/M/2011 . 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI