Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune
Bansi Collections,, Sangli vs Assessee on 19 December, 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH "A", PUNE
BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
SHRI R. S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.967/PUN/2011
Assessment Year:2006-07
M/s Bansi Collections v. ITO, Ward 1(1)
Kapad Peth Sangli
PAN:AABFB6378D
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by: None
Respondent by: Shri. Mukesh Verma
Date of hearing: 19.12.2012
Date of pronouncement: 09.01.2013
ORDER
PER R. S. PADVEKAR:
This appeal is filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A), Kolhapur dated 28.6.2011 for assessment year 2006-07.
2. When this appeal was called for hearing, the ld. D.R. for the Revenue was present. None was present on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has not even filed any application for adjournment. On perusal of record, it is seen that notice of hearing has been served on the assessee intimating the date of hearing, but the assessee preferred not to respond to the same. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal.
3. In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461, their Lordships of the Supreme Court has observed that an appeal means an effective appeal. It may mean to prosecute or effectively pursue a proceeding. In the present case, in our opinion, the assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. We are, therefore, constrained to dismiss this appeal as not admitted for the want of :-2-:
prosecution. The assessee is at liberty to move the application for restoration of the appeal showing reasonable cause for non-attendance on the date of hearing.
4. In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed in limine.
Order pronounced in the open court on 9th January, 2013.
Sd/- Sd/-
[G. S. PANNU] [R. S. PADVEKAR]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
DATED: 9th January, 2013
JJ:0701
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT(A)
4. CIT
5. DR
Assistant Registrar