Hindustan Storage & Distribution Company Ltdn, Kolkata V. THE DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 951/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1137 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G MALLIKARJUNA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & SRI M.BALA GANESH, AM ] I.T.A NOS. 950 & 951/KOL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006- 07 & 2007-08 HINDUSTAN STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. -VS.- DCIT, CC-XXVI, KOLKATA [PAN : AAACH 7211 B] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A NOS. 952 & 953/KOL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006- 07 & 2007-08 RAM GOPAL SARAF -VS.- DCIT, CC-XX VI, KOLKATA [PAN : AMAPS 8233 A] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI G. MALLIKARJUNA, C IT DR DATE OF HEARING : 24.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.11.2017 ORDER PER BENCH: 1. THESE APPEALS OF THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARISE OUT OF THE INDEPENDENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), CENTR AL-II, KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD CITA] IN APPEAL NOS.93 & 94/CC-XXVI/CIT(A)C-II/09- 10 DATED 28.02.2014 IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION COMPANY PV T. LTD. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY AND THE SEPARATE O RDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), CENTRAL-II, KOLKATA IN APPE AL NOS. 86 & 87/CC- XXVII/CIT(A)C-II/09-10 DATED 26.02.2014 AND 28.02.2 014 RESPECTIVELY IN THE CASE OF RAM GOPAL SARAF FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AN D 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY, PASSED AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE DCIT, CC-XXVII, KO LKATA [IN SHORT THE LD. AO] UNDER 2 ITA NOS.950-953/KOL/2014 HINDUSTAN STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. & RAM GOP AL SARAF A.YR.2006-07 TO 2007-08 2 SECTION 153C / 153A/ 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) AS THE CASE MAY BE, DATED 10.07.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 TO 2007- 08 RESPECTIVELY FOR BOTH THE ASSESSEES. 2. THESE APPEALS WERE LISTED FOR HEARING ON SEVERA L DATES I.E. 30.01.2017, 12.04.2017, 13.06.2017 & 31.08.2017. ON 31.08.2017 , THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO 24.10.2017 AND BOTH THE COUNSELS WERE DULY INFORMED ABOUT THE SAME. WHEN THE CASES WERE CALLED FOR HEARING ON 24.10.2017, NONE APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES NOR AN ADJOURNMENT PETITIONS WERE FILED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEES. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEES ARE NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THESE APPEALS. HENCE TH ESE APPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSEC UTION. FOR THIS VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRJEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 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 BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEES, IF SO DESIRE, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THESE ORDERS BY EXPLAINING WITH PROPER REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE, THEN THESE ORDERS MAY BE RECALLED. 3 ITA NOS.950-953/KOL/2014 HINDUSTAN STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. & RAM GOP AL SARAF A.YR.2006-07 TO 2007-08 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 01.11.2017. SD/- SD/- [A.T.VARKEY] [ M.BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 01.11.2017 SB, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. HINDUSTAN STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. AND RA M GOPAL SARAF, 53, CHOWRINGHEE ROAD, KOLKATA-700071 2. DCIT, CC-XXVII, AAYAKAR BHAWAN PURVA, 110, SHANT IPALLI, KOLKATA-700107 3.CIT(A)- KOLKATA 4. CIT-KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVA TE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHE S