Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Shri Bhagwatiben Jayantilal Patel,, ... vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1,, Patan on 15 October, 2018
ITA No.1025/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD "SMC" BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM] ITA No.1025/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Bhagwatiben Jayantilal Patel, ........................Appellant Umiya Paru No.1, Unjha.
[PAN: AQVPP 7532 M] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Patan. .......................Respondent Appearances by:
None for the Appellant Sonia Kumar for the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 11.10.2018 Date of pronouncing the order : 15.10.2018 O R D E R
1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 22.02.2017, passed by the learned CIT(A), Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad, in the matter of assessment under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year 2008-09, on the following grounds :-
"1. Ld. CIT(A) had erred in holding validity of re-opening and reassessment u/s.147, in as much as, 1.1 The notice u/s 148 dt. 27.03.2015 issued by A.O. ward-1, Mehsana was without jurisdiction since appellant was assessed by A.O. ward-1, Patan. The reassessment is bad in law and void ab initio.
1.2 Reasons recorded u/s 147 not supplied to appellant and procedure of reassessment as ruled by Hon. SC is not followed by A.O. 259 ITR 19 (SC).
2. Learned CIT(A) had erred in confirming addition on basis of peak credit at Rs.16,43,500/- out of total addition made by A.O. at Rs.27,33,500/-.ITA No.1025/Ahd/2017
Assessment Year: 2008-09 Page 2 of 2
3. Learned CIT(A) had erred in further confirming addition of Rs.49,500/- from cash book, without giving notice of enhancement and further opportunity to the appellant."
2. It is noticed that when the matter came up for hearing, none appeared for and on behalf of the assessee appellant despite notice having been sent by Registered Post. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue its case. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. I, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution.
3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 15th day of October, 2018.
Sd/-
Pramod Kumar (Accountant Member) Dated: Ahmedabad, the 15 th day of October, 2018.
PBN/*
Copies to: (1) The appellant
(2) The respondent
(3) CIT
(4) CIT(A)
(5) DR
(6) Guard File
By order
Assistant Registrar
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad