Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
M/S A D Electrosteel Co. Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, ... on 20 August, 2018
आयकर अपील य अधीकरण, यायपीठ - "B" कोलकाता,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH "" KOLKATA
Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and
Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member
ITA No.854/Kol/2017
Assessment Year:2012-13
M/s Ad Electrosteel Co. बनाम / DCIT, Circle-1(1),
Pvt. Ltd., Baltikuri, V/s . 54/1, Rafi Ahmed
Surkimil, Kalitala, Kidwai Road,Kolkata-
Dasnagar, Howrah-711402 16
[PAN No.AACCA 1827 A]
अपीलाथ /Appellant .. यथ /Respondent
अपीलाथ क ओर से/By Appellant None
यथ क ओर से/By Respondent Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT-DR
सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing 20-08-2018
घोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement 20-08-2018
आदे श /O R D E R
PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:-
This assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6 Kolkata's dated 03.11.2016, passed in case No.156/CIT(A)-6/Kol/2015-16, in proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Today when the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any application for an adjournment filed by the assessee in spite of issue of notice by RPAD. It appears that the assessee is not serious in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non- prosecution. For this view, we find support from the following decisions:-
"1. In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattacharjee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that:
"The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it."ITA No.854/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13
M/s AD Electdrosteel Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kol. Page 2
3. In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order:
"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."
4. In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.
5. We observe that if the Assessee is advised to file appropriate application for recalling the order on just cause it will be decided in accordance with law.
6. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.
Order pronounced in open court on 20/08/2018
Sd/- Sd/-
(लेखा सद&य) ( या(यक सद&य)
(J.Sudhakar Reddy) (S.S.Godara)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
*Dkp-Sr.PS
)दनांकः- 20/08/2018 कोलकाता / Kolkata
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant-M/s AD Electrosteel Co. Pvt. Ltd. Baltikuri, Surkimil, Kalitala Dasnagar, Howrah-71402
2. यथ /Respondent-DCIT, Circle-1(1), 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Kolkata-16
3. संबं,धत आयकर आयु-त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आय-
ु त- अपील / CIT (A)
5. .वभागीय (त(न,ध, आयकर अपील य अ,धकरण कोलकाता/DR, ITAT, Kolkata
6. गाड2 फाइल / Guard file.
By order/आदे श से, /True Copy/ Sr. Private Secretary, Head of Office/DDO आयकर अपील य अ,धकरण, कोलकाता