ITO, Wd.-4, Pune V. Dr. savita D. Shirsath, Shrirampur

MA 50/PUN/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1002 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-02-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K OJHA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.50/PN/2011 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1525/PN/2008) (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) DR. (MRS.) SAVITA D. SHIRSATH SHIRSATH ACCIDENT HOSPITAL, NORTHERN BRANCH, AT & PO : SHRIRAMPUR PAN : ADVPS1334P . APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4, AHMEDNAGAR . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : MR. S. N. PURANIK RESPONDENT BY : MR. K. K. OJHA DATE OF HEARING : 02-08-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02-08-2013 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 21. 01.2011 WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IN ITA NO.1525/PN/2008 AND ASSESS EES CROSS OBJECTION NO. 11/PN/2010 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 05-06 WERE DISPOSED-OFF AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE ON MERITS. 2. BY WAY OF THE PRESENT PETITION THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE CONTAINED IN PARA 6 OF THE PETITION IS AS UNDER :- 6. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, SINCERELY REQUESTS THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL TO RESTORE THE APPEAL AND GRANT AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE TO A NEXT DATE AS THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DECIDES. 3. FURTHER, THE PETITIONER HAS AVERRED IN THE PETIT ION AS UNDER :- 2. AN ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE BENCH B, DATED JANUARY 21, 2011 HAS BEEN PASSED THAT FOR NON APPEA RANCE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE. MA NO.50/PN/2011 DR. (MRS.) SAVITA D. SHIRSATH A.Y. : 2005-06 4. FROM THE AFORESAID CONTENTS OF THE PETITION, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE SAME IS MISCONCEIVED. AS PER THE PETITIONER, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT APPEAL BE RESTORED AS ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING OF THE REASONS STATED THEREIN. 5. IT IS QUITE EVIDENT THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVEN UE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISPOSED-OFF ON MERITS AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL RE PRESENTATIVE AND ALSO THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WERE ON RECORD. THE APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE, AS CONTENDED BY THE P ETITIONER. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, T HE LEARNED COUNSEL HAS ALSO NOT MADE ANY ARGUMENT TO SUPPORT THE PRAYER MADE IN THE PETITION AND THEREFORE, IN OUR VIEW, THE PRESENT PETITION REQUES TING FOR RE-CALLING OF THE ORDER DATED 21.01.2011 (SUPRA) IS MISCONCEIVED, AS DISCUS SED ABOVE. MOREOVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING EVEN ON MERITS, THE LEARNED COU NSEL FOR THE PETITIONER HAS NOT ASSAILED THE ORDER DATED 21.01.2011 (SUPRA). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE CAPTIONED MISCELLANEOUS APPLI CATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED, AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN CO URT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING O N 02 ND AUGUST, 2013. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (G . S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 02 ND AUGUST, 2013 SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-I, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-I, PUNE; 5) THE DR, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PUNE