Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Orchid Pharma Limited, Chennai vs Dcit, Chennai on 27 November, 2017
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, "डी" यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'D' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद य एवं ी धु वु आर.एल रे डी, या यक सद य के सम
Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member &
Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member
आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 73/Mds/2017
नधारण वष/Assessm ent Year :2012-13
M/s. Orchid Pharma Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of
[Formerly Orchid Chemicals and Vs. Income Tax,
pharmaceuticals ltd.), Orchid Towers, Company Circle 5(1),
313, Valluvarkottam High Road, Chennai 600 034.
Chennai 600 034.
[PAN: AAACO0402B]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
अपीलाथ क ओर से / Appellant by : None
यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Mrs. Ruby George, CIT
सुनवाई क तार ख/ Date of he a ring : 14.11.2017
घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronoun cement : 27.11.2017
आदेश /O R D E R
PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Dispute Resolution Panel 2, Bengaluru and the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short].
2. The appeal was initially posted for hearing on 28.02.2017 and notice issued was duly served on the assessee. The hearing of the appeal was 2 I.T.A. No. 73/M/17 adjourned to 20.04.2017 at the request of the ld. Counsel. Similarly, the hearings were adjourned to 20.06.2017, 29.08.2017 and 14.11.2017 at the request of the ld. Counsel and having noted the date of hearing, he has endorsed in the order sheet. However, when the appeal was taken up for hearing on 14.11.2017, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Further, defects found in the appeal filed by the assessee were notified in the 'Defect Memo', but neither the assessee rectified the defects notified by the Tribunal nor put his appearance on the day of hearing of the appeal. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
3. Therefore, having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) and the judgment of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on the 27th November, 2017 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (DUVVURU RL REDDY)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Chennai, Dated, 27.11.2017
Vm/-
3 I.T.A. No. 73/M/17
आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant, 2. यथ / Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु त (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु त/CIT, 5. वभागीय त न ध/DR & 6. गाड फाईल/GF.