Smt Sudha Goyal, Bhopal v. The ACIT, Bhopal

ITA 230/IND/2009 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 23022714 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN ADVPG5185E
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 230/IND/2009
Duration Of Justice 11 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant Smt Sudha Goyal, Bhopal
Respondent The ACIT, Bhopal
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 06-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 06-05-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 06-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 06-05-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 08-05-2009
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.230/IND/2009 AY: 2005-06 SMT. SUDHA GOYAL PROP. M/S. VINAYAKAR CREATION 35 PATRAKAR NAGAR KOLAR ROAD BHOPAL (PAN ADVPG 5185 E) ..APPELLANT V/S. ACIT-2(1) BHOPAL ..RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI V.K. KARAN SR. DR ORDER PER BENCH THIS APPEAL IS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-II INDORE DATED 16.12.2008 FOR THE AY 2005-06 ON THE GROUNDS AS DETAILED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. DURING HEARING O F THIS APPEAL NOBODY IS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS SHRI V.K . KARAN LD. SR. DR IS PRESENT FOR THE REVENUE. THIS APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 8.5.2009 AS IS EVIDENT FROM ORDER SHEET ENTRY OF EVEN DATE. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING 2 FOR TODAY I.E. 6.5.2010 FOR WHICH REGISTERED NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADDRESS AS PROVIDED IN FORM NO.36. THE NOTICE COULD NOT BE SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH T HE NOTICE WAS RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK THAT THE HOUSE OF THE ADDRESSEE WAS FOUND LOCKED ON EACH VISIT SO LE TTER CANT BE DELIVERED. NO OTHER ADDRESS WAS PROVIDED FOR THE PU RPOSE OF SERVICE. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE ITS APPEAL THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE KEPT PENDING ADJUDICATION F OR INDEFINITE PERIOD. MERE FILING OF APPEAL IS NOT ENOUGH RATHER IT REQUI RES EFFECTIVE PROSECUTION ALSO. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT FILED A NY INFORMATION WITH THE REGISTRY FOR HIS NON-APPEARANCE. IN VIEW OF THI S FACT WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE FOR DISMISSAL. OUR VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS: I) IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 AND 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. II) IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. C WT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER: 3 IF THE PARTY AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEAR ING OF THE REFERENCE THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. III) IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL) THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEA RING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVEN UE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON TH E BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED SR. DR ON 6.5.2010. (V.K. GUPTA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 6.5.2010 !VYAS! COPY TO:APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR/GUARD FI LE