M/s S S Enterprise, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-26(3), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 946/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9620 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MD G HYAS UDDIN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D, BENC H KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM & DR. A.L.SAI NI, AM ./ ITA NO.946/KOL/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-2008) M/S S.S.ENTERPRISE, KAMALGAZI, NARENDRAPUR, KOLKATA-700103 VS. ITO, WARD-53(2), KOLKATA, PRESENTLY ITO WARD-26(3), AAYAKAR BHAWAN DAKSHIN, 2, GARIAHAT ROAD(SOUTH), KOLKATA-700068 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ABEFS 2293 Q ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MD. GHYAS UDDIN, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 04/01/2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/01/2017 / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2016 OF CIT(A)-7, KOLKATA, RELATING TO AY 200 7-08. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 04.01.2017 AS PER THE ADJOURNMENT LETTER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 28. 11.2016. HOWEVER NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DA TE OF HEARING. NEITHER ANY FURTHER ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LO RDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. ITA NO.946/16 M/S S.S.ENTERPRISE 2 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INS TANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN T HEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATI ON OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEA RING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATIO N OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THA T DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . CONSIDERING THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS , WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 04/01 /2017. SD/ - (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) S D/ - (DR. A.L.SAINI) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /KOLKATA ; ! DATED 04/01/2017 ' $%& /PRAKASH MISHRA , 0 . / PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, / ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) % & , / ITAT, 1. / THE APPELLANT-M/S S.S.ENTERPRISE 2. / THE RESPONDENT.-ITO WARD-53(2), KOLKATA 3. 1 ( ) / THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4. 1 / CIT 5. 23 4 0056 , 56 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 4 78 / GUARD FILE. 2 0 //TRUE COPY//