Conexant Systems Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-1(2), Hyderabad

MA 158/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8994 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISHA S GUPT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 158/HYD/2012 (IN ITA NO. 1160/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 CONEXANT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., APPLICANT HYDERABAD (PAN AACF2723N)) VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, RESPONDENT WARD - 12(2), HYDERABAD. APPLICANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT DATE OF HEARING : 07/09/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 /09/2012 ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M.: THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT A BENCH, HYDERABAD BENCHES, HYDERABAD, IN APPEAL ITA NO. 310/HYD/2010 DATED 19/01/2012, WHICH WAS PASSED EX-PARTE BY THE ITAT. THE ASSESSEE IN THE MA , BESIDES MENTIONING THE REASONS FOR NOT ATTENDING THE HEARIN G OF HIS CASE, REQUESTED THAT NON ATTENDANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARIN G WAS OUT OF INADVERTENCE AND NOT AS THE ASSESSEE WAS DISINTERES TED IN PROSECUTION OF APPEAL. 2. WHEN THIS M.A. WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE US O N 07/09/2012, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF THE APPLICANT NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPLICANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSEC UTING ITS M.A. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE C ASE OF B.N. M.A. NO. 1 58/HYD/12 M/S CONEXANT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. 2 BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFE CTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, CO URT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSEC UTION AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHE MIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPL AN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRA O HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DISMISS THIS M.A. OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE M.A. FILED BY THE APPLICANT I S DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07/09/2012. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (ASHA VIJAYARAGH AVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R HYDERABAD, DATED: 07/09/2012 KV COPY TO:- 1) CONEXANT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., 5 TH FLOOR, PIONEER TOWERS, PLOT NO. 16, SURVEY NO. 64/2, SOFTWARE UNIT LAYOUT, MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD 500 081. 2) ITO, WARD -1(2), HYDERABAD 3) CIT (A)-III, HYDERABAD 4) THE CIT-I, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYD ERABAD.