Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Republic Stores (Trade), Kolkata vs Jcit, R-56, Kolkata, Kolkata on 11 October, 2017
आयकर अपील य अधीकरण, यायपीठ - "A" कोलकाता,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH "A" KOLKATA
Before Shri Aby.T Varkey, Judicial Member and
Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member
ITA No.716/Kol/2015
Assessment Year:2010-11
Republic Stores (Trade) V/s. JCIT, Range-56,
13B, Chittaranjan Avenue, 3, Government Place
Central, Kolkata-72 (W est), Kolkta-001
[P AN No. AADFR 7428 N]
अपीलाथ /Appellant .. यथ /Respondent
अपीलाथ क ओर से/By Appellant None
यथ क ओर से/By Respondent Shri D.Z. Chowngth, Addl. CIT-DR
सन
ु वाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing 11-10-2017
घोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement 11-10-2017
आदे श /O R D E R
PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-
This appeal filed by the assessee is for the Assessment Year 2010-11 directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-12, Kolkata dated 27.01.2015.
2. When the matter was called upon for hearing no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any application for adjournment was filed, there was no response from the side of the assessee though the notice of hearing was issued to the assessee by RPAD at the address furnished by the assessee in column 10 of the memo of appeal in form no. 36. From the above, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case.
3. Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), the assessee's appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
ITA No.716/Kol/2015 A.Y. 2010-11Republic Stores (Trade) Vs. JCIT, Rg-56, Kol. Page 2
4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under:
"if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference."
5. Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference an answered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee.
6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.
7. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by moving an appropriate petition, as per law.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine.
Order pronounced in the court at the close of the hearing i.e., 11th October,2017 Sd/- Sd/-
(Aby. T. Varkey) (Waseem Ahmed) (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Kolkata, *Dkp #दनांकः- 11/10/2017 कोलकाता । आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant-Republic Stores (Trade), 13B, Chittaranjan Avenue, Cenral,Kol-72
2. यथ /Respondent-JCIT, Range-56, 3 Govt. Place (West), Kolkata-001
3. संबं/धत आयकर आयु0त / Concerned CIT Kolkata
4. आयकर आयु0त- अपील / CIT (A) Kolkata
5. 3वभागीय 6त6न/ध, आयकर अपील य अ/धकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata
6. गाड9 फाइल / Guard file.
By order/आदे श से, /True Copy/ Sr. Private Secretary, Head of Office/DDO आयकर अपील य अ/धकरण, कोलकाता ।