M/S. MAC ENTERPRISES, V. ACIT 10(2),

MA 64/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8202 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI G BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P M JAGTAP, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.64/MUM/2011 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 666/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) M/S MAC ENTERPRISES A-102 SUJATA SHOPPING CENTRE NAVGHAR ROAD BHAYNADER (|E) DIST THANE VS THE ASST COMMR OF INCOME TAX 10(2), THANE (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAHFM6285G ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH M RAJAN DT.OF HEARING 11 TH MAY 2012 DT OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11 TH ,MAY 2012 ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.9.2010 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.666/MUM/2 010 WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. 2 IT IS TRANSPIRED FROM THE RECORD THAT THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS FIRSTLY LISTED ON 3.2.201 2 BUT NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THAT DATE OF HEARING; THEREFORE, TH E MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ADJOURNED TO 9.3.2012 AND FRESH NOTICE WAS ISSUED T O THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, AGAIN ON 3.4.2012 AND 11.5.2012 NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS LISTED FOR HEARING. THE NOTICES ISSUED TO THE M/S MAC ENTERPRISES MA NO.64/MUM/2011 2 ASSESSEE AT BOTH THE GIVEN ADDRESSES HAVE BEEN RECE IVED BACK UNDELIVERED WITH THE REPORT THAT INTIMATION WAS GIVEN BUT NOT CLAIME D. 3 THUS, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERES TED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND THEREFORE, THERE IS N O CHANGE IN THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DIS MISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLAN EOUS APPLICATION TO AVOID THE DEMAND VIDE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 29.12.2010. ACCO RDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLIC ATION IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. 4 IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING I.E. ON 11 TH MAY 2012 SD/- SD/- ( P M JAGTAP ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 11 TH , MAY 2012RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI