PUSHPABEN V. PAREKH, V. ITO 13(3)(4),

MA 7/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9418 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI C BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P M JAGTAP , AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM MISCALLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 07/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2142/MUM/2011 (ASST YEAR 2007-08 ) PUSHABEN V PAREKH 17 HANUMAN BLDG 67 MUMBADEVI RO0AD PHDHONIE MUMBAI 3 VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 13(3)(4), MUMBAI (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AFWPP8692L ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH K G KUTTY DT.OF HEARING 12 OCT 2012 DT OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 OCT 2012 PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21 ST OCT 2011 OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2142/MUM/2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. WE NOTE THAT EVEN ON EARLIER OCCASIONS ON 6 TH JULY AND 10 TH AUG 2012 NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT THROUGH RPAD HAS BEEN RETURNED BACK WI TH THE POSTAL REMARKS AS LEFT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF VIEW THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION; THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. MA 07/MUM/2012 2 2.1 EVEN OTHERWISE, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE ISS UE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WHICH TOUCHES UPON THE MERITS OF THE CA SE AS DECIDED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. FROM THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLIC ATION, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE SEEKS THE REVIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED ON ME RITS AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT FACTS, MATERIAL AND CONTENTION OF THE PART IES. THEREFORE, ONCE THIS TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS, RELEVANT MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE HAS GIVEN A FINDING ON MERIT, THE SAME CANNOT BE REVIEWED OR REVERSED IN T HE PROCEEDINGS U/S 254(2). ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY SUBSTANCE OR MERITS IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS D ESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 3 IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING I.E. ON 12TH OCT 2012. SD/- SD/- ( P M JAGTAP ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 12 TH , OCT 2012 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI