Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
M/S. Hanuman Apartment Pvt. Ltd., , ... vs Acit, Circle - 9, , Kolkata on 15 March, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH "SMC" KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member ITA No.2122/Kol/2018 Assessment Year:2006-07 M/s Hanuman Apartment बनाम ACIT, Circle-9, Pvt. Ltd., 156-A, Rabindra / Kolkata Sarani, Room No.213, V/s .
Kolkata-700013
अपीलाथ /Appellant .. यथ /Respondent
अपीलाथ क ओर से/By Appellant None
यथ क ओर से/By Respondent Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT-SR-DR
सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing 06-03-2019
घोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement 15-03-2019
आदे श /O R D E R
This assessee's appeal for assessment year 2006-07, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-16, Kolkata's order dated 31.08.2018 passed in case No.401/CIT(A)-16/Cir-9/2006-07, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short 'the Act'.
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, I 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.2122/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2006-07
M/s Hanuman Apartment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Cir-9, 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. I 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 15/03/2019 Sd/-
(S.S. Godara)
Judicial Member
Kolkata,
*Dkp/Sr.PS
दनांकः- 15/03/2019 कोलकाता
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant-M/s Hanuman Apartment Pvt. Ltd., 156-A, Rabindra Sarani Room No.213, Kolkat-13
2. यथ /Respondent-ACIT, Circle-9, Kolkata
3. संबं"धत आयकर आय% ु त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आयु%त- अपील / CIT (A)
5. &वभागीय )त)न"ध, आयकर अपील य अ"धकरण कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata
6. गाड+ फाइल / Guard file.
By order/आदे श से, /True Copy/ उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता ।