Mico Ball Bearing India Ltd, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

MA 78/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6912 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI (FRIDAY) BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI B.C. MEENA M.A. NO. 78/DEL/2011 ( IN ITA NO.3284/DEL/08 ) ASSTT. YR: 1998-99 MICO BALL BEARING (INDIA) LTD., VS. INCOME-TAX O FFICER, C/O RAJEEV & CO., WARD-6(4), NEW DELHI. 1-9, SHIVLOK HOUSE-1, KARAMPURA, NEW DELHI. PAN/GIR NO. AACCM9988Q ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ROHIT GARG SR. DR O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M : THIS IS ASSESSEES MISC. APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF ITAT ORDER DATED 23-07-201 0 PASSED IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL. 2. NONE PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE HEARING FIXED FOR 02-09-2011 DESPITE ISSUE OF NOTICE FOR HEARING BY REGISTERED A.D. POST. EVEN NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF HEARING HAS BEEN RECEIVED. IT GIVES AN IMPRESSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE M.A. WE, 2 THEREFORE, HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THE M.A. PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, PLACING RELIANCE ON THE RATIO OF DECISIONS IN THE F OLLOWING CASES: CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL .); AND LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP). 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES M.A. IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 02-09-2011. SD/ SD/- ( B.C. MEENA ) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 02-09-2011. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR