M/s. Gujarat Optical Communication Ltd.,, Ahmedabad v. The Income tax Officer,Ward-4(4),, Ahmedabad

ITA 3749/AHD/2007 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 374920514 RSA 2007
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 3749/AHD/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 7 month(s)
Appellant M/s. Gujarat Optical Communication Ltd.,, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Income tax Officer,Ward-4(4),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 28-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 28-04-2010
Next Hearing Date 28-04-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 28-09-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: AHMEDABAD C BENCH (BEFORE S/SHRI MUKUL SHRAWAT JM & A.N.PAHUJA AM ) ITA NO. 3749/AHD/2007 ASSTT. YEAR:- 2003-04 GUJRAT OPTICAL COMMUNICATION LTD. 4 TH FLOOR GTCL HOUSE B/H RATNAM BUILDING OPP. C.G.ROAD AHMEDABAD. [PAN:AAACG5578L] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4) AHMEDABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI M.C.PANDIT DR O R D E R A.N. PAHUJA: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST A N ORDER DATED 7.9.2007 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-VIII AHMEDABAD. N ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE[AD ON RECORD ] WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS F ILED. IT THEREFORE APPEARS THAT THE ASSESEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEA L. RECENTLY HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 17.9.2009 IN M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN CEA NO. 62 OF 2009 REFERRED TO A DECISION OF HO NBLE APEX COURT IN SUNDERLAL VS. NANDRAMDAS AIR 1958 MP 260 WHEREIN IT WAS OBSE RVED THAT THOUGH THE ACT DOES NOT GIVE ANY POWER OF DISMISSAL IT IS AXIOMAT IC THAT NO COURT OR TRIBUNAL IS SUPPOSED TO CONTINUE A PROCEEDING BEFORE IT WHEN TH E PARTY WHO HAS MOVED IT HAS NOT APPEARED NOR CARED TO REMAIN PRESENT. HOBB LE COURT THUS HELD THAT T HE DISMISSAL IS AN INHERENT POWER WHICH EVERY TRIBUNAL POSSESSES . THIS WAS APPROVED IN DR. P. NALLA THAMPY VS. SHANKAR 1984 (SUPP) SCC 631. IN NEW INDIA ASSURANCE VS. SRINIVASAN (2000) 3 SCC 242 IT WAS HELD THAT EVERY COURT OR JUDICIAL BODY OR AUTHORITY WHICH HAS A DUTY TO DEC IDE A LIS BETWEEN TWO PARTIES INHERENTLY POSSESSES THE POWER TO DISMISS A CASE IN DEFAULT. WHERE A CASE IS CALLED UP FOR HEARING AND THE PARTY IS NOT PRESENT THE COURT OR THE JUDICIAL OR QUASI JUDICIAL BODY IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO KEEP THE MA TTER PENDING BEFORE IT OR TO PURSUE THE MATTER ON BEHALF OF THE PARTY WHO HAD IN STITUTED THE PROCEEDINGS. THAT ITA NO. 3749/AHD/2007 2 IS NOT THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT OR FOR THAT MATTE R OF A JUDICIAL OR QUASI JUDICIAL BODY. IN THE LIGHT OF VIEW TAKEN IN THESE DECISION S HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THEIR AFORESAID DECISION HELD THAT EVERY COURT OR TRIBUNAL HAS AN INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS A PROCEEDING FOR NON PROSECUTION W HEN THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT BEFORE IT DOES NOT WISH TO PRO SECUTE THE PROCEEDING . IN VIEW THEREOF FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI B ENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS CIT [38 ITD 320] (DEL) AND THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ES TATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT [(1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP)] THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 2. IN THE RESULT APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 28.04.2010 SD/- SD/- (MUKUL SHRAWAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A.N. PAHUJA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD DATED 28.04.2010 . COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : THE ASSESSEE/ INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4) AHMEDABAD / THE CIT/ THE CIT(A)-VIII AHMEDABAD/ DR/ GUARD FILE BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH ITA NO. 3749/AHD/2007 3