Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Sumaraj Seafoods P. Ltd , Mumbai vs Assessee
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण "E " यायपीठ मंब
ु ई म।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI
ी पी.एम. जगताप, लेखा सद य एवं ववेक वमा; या यक सद य के सम ।
BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, AM AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JM
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7692 /Mum/2011
( नधारण वष / Assessment Year : 2006-07)
M/s Sumaraj Seafoods बनाम/
बनाम A.C.I.T. - 2(3),
Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai.
Vs.
262, 2 n d floor,
Room No. 20,
Captain Building,
S.B. Singh Road, Fort,
Mumbai - 400 001.
थायी ले खा सं . /PAN :AACCS 2654B
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) .. ( यथ / Respondent)
अपीलाथ क ओर से / Appellant by : None
यथ क ओर से/ Respondent by : Shri Pitambar Das
सनवाई
ु क तार ख / Date of Hearing : 07-10-13
घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.13
आदे श / O R D E R
PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. :
पी.एम. जगताप, लेखा सद य This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) - 6, Mumbai dated 19-09-2011.
2 ITA 7692/M/11
2. In this case, the hearing was initially fixed on 22-10-12. The assessee, however, sought adjournment of the said hearing and accordingly the hearing was adjourned to 08-04-2013. On 08-04-2013, the assessee again sought adjournment by an application dated 02-04-13 and accordingly the hearing was adjourned to 7-10-13. On 07-10-13 i.e. today nobody, however, has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. It appears from this non-compliant and non-cooperative attitude of the assessee that it is not seriously interested in prosecuting its appeal.
3. In the case of B.N. Bhattachargee and Anr. (118 ITR 461) (at pages 477/478) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that appeal does not mean only filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the assessee does not want to pursue the appeal, Court/Tribunal have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009. To the similar effect are the decisions of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar - 223 ITR 480 (M.P) and the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del).
4. Keeping in view the ratio of the judicial pronouncements as discussed above and having regard to the facts of the case, we treat this appeal of the assessee as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free to move the Tribunal explaining the reasons for non-compliance and for recalling of this order and if the Bench is so satisfied, then this order may be recalled.
3 ITA 7692/M/11
5. In the result, the assessee's appeal stands dismissed.
प रणामतः नधा रती क अपील खा रज क जाती है ।
Order pronounced in the open court on 07-10-2013. . आदे श क घोषणा खले ु यायालय म दनांकः 07-10-2013 को क गई ।
Sd/- sd/-
(VIVEK VARMA) (P.M. JAGTAP)
या यक सद य JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
मंुबई Mumbai; दनांक Dated 07-10-2013.
व. न.स./ RK , Sr. PS
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy
षत of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयु (अपील) / The CIT(A)-6, Mumbai
4. आयकर आयु / CIT - City - 2, Mumbai
5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मंुबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai "E" Bench
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
ु / BY ORDER,
आदे शानसार
स या पत त //True Copy//
उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.
उप/ Registrar)
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,
धकरण, मंुबई / ITAT, Mumbai