Mr. A.Silvestor, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITSSA 3/CHNY/1999

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1084 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 16 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 24-11-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-1999
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH IRS
• Keywords: Block assessment
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! ' , #'$ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T(SS).A.NO.03/MDS/1999 BLOCK PERIOD : 1.4.1986 TO 08.10.1996 SHRI. A. SILVESTOR, M/S. FEENA PETRO PRODUCTS LTDS, 622, MOUNT ROAD, CHENNAI 600 006. VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE III(5). CHENNAI [PAN EVKPS 4445A] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) %& ' ( / APPELLANT BY : NONE )*%& ' ( /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. A.V.SREEKANTH, IRS, JCIT. ! ' + / DATE OF HEARING : 24.11.2015 ,-. ' + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.11.2015 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST THE ORDER OF DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE III(5), CHENNAI DATED 27.11.19 98 PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S.158BD OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 (IN IT(SS)A NO.03/MDS/1999. :- 2 -: SHORT THE ACT) FOR THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT PERIOD FROM 1.4.1986 TO 08.10.1996. 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED UP ON THE DATE OF HEA RING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ON EARLIER DAT E OF HEARING I.E. 19.08.2015, THERE WAS A DIRECTION TO INFORM THE ASS ESSEE, ACCORDINGLY NOTICE WAS SENT BY RPAD AND WAS RETURNED UNSERVED WITH NOTING ON THE ENVELOPE AS LEFT. TODAY ALSO AT THE TIME OF HEARING THERE WAS NO REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED. FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESS EE IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APP EAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE BEING AN INDIVIDUAL, SHOULD HAVE INTIMATED CHANGE OF ADDRESS IF ANY, AS NOTICE ISSUED BY THE TRIBUNAL HAS RETURNED UNSERVED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS HELD BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LIMITED 38 ITD 320 THAT THERE MAY BE VARIOUS REASONS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT BE ABSENCE TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL AND ALSO FOLLOWING DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF HELIOS AND MATHESON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LIMITED VS ITO IN ITA NO.134/MDS/2011, D ATED 05.07.2011, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. HOWEVER, W E MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FI LE A PETITION TO RECALL IT(SS)A NO.03/MDS/1999. :- 3 -: THIS ORDER PROVIDED SUFFICIENT CAUSE BE EXPLAINED F OR NON APPEARANCE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN IT( SS)A NO.3/MDS/1999 IS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . ! ' ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI / / DATED:26.11.2015 KV 0 ' )#+12 32.+ / COPY TO: 1 . %& / APPELLANT 3. ! 4+ () / CIT(A) 5. 2 78 )#+# / DR 2. )*%& / RESPONDENT 4. ! 4+ / CIT 6. 89 : / GF