Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: articles on VAT and GST in India :: VAT RATES :: due date for vat payment :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: VAT Audit :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: TDS :: form 3cd :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: empanelment
 
 
From the Courts »
 Delhi High Court interprets applicability of amendments to Arbitration Act
  M/s Skin Institute And Public Services Charitable Trust Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)
 M/s Skin Institute And Public Services Charitable Trust Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)
 ITO vs. Emami Paper Mills Ltd (ITAT Kolkata)
 Surya Prakash Toshniwal HUF vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
 CIT vs. Subhash Vinayak Supnekar (Bombay High Court)
 Apollo Tyres Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin)
 CIT vs. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (Supreme Court)
 DCIT vs. M. K. Enterprise (ITAT Kolkata)
 Qad Europe B.V. vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai)
 Chalasani Naga Ratna Kumari vs. ITO (ITAT Vizag)a

M/s. SDL Steel Pvt. Ltd. 21-53-A, Brindavan Soc., Thane (W) 400601 Vs. ITO Ward 7(2)(2) Mumbai : 400007
October, 26th 2012
             IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
           MUMBAI "E" BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI


                BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
                                  AND
                  SHRI RAJENDRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)


                             ITA No. : 2279/Mum/2011
                             Assessment Year : 2007-08

M/s. SDL Steel Pvt. Ltd.                  Vs. ITO Ward 7(2)(2)
21-53-A, Brindavan Soc.,                      Mumbai : 400007
Thane (W) 400601

PAN No. AAACS9479E

              (Appellant )                                 (Respondent)


                 Assessee by                   :   None
                 Revenue by                    :   Mr. V. Krishnmoorth

                 Date of hearing               :   25.10.2012
                 Date of pronouncement         :   25.10.2012





                                       ORDER
PER RAJENDRA, A.M.

      The assessee has filed this appeal against the order dt. 21.10.2010 of the

CIT(A)-13, Mumbai on the following Grounds:


      "I      FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL :

           1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in confirming disallowance of
              electricity expenses of Rs.52,27,316.
           2. He failed to appreciate that the electricity expenses allowable as
              expenses.
           3. The appellant prays that the disallowance of electricity expenses of
              Rs.52,27,316 be deleted.

      II      SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL :

           1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in confirming disallowance of
              transportation expenses of Rs.10,75,721.
           2. He failed to appreciate that the transportation expenses allowable as
              expenses.
           3. The appellant prays that the disallowance of transportation expenses of
              Rs.10,75,721 be deleted.
                                          2
                                                              ITA No. : 2279/Mum/2011
                                                                M/s. SDL Steel Pvt. Ltd.




      III      THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL :

            1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in confirming disallowance of
               Rs.2,55,117 (being 10% of 25,51,175) on account of salary expenses.
            2. He failed to appreciate that the expenditure were allowable as
               expenses.
            3. The appellant prays that the disallowance of expenditure of
               Rs.2,55,117 be deleted."



2.      On 25.10.2012 when the case taken up for hearing no one appeared on

behalf of assessee. Nor there was any application for adjournment.           From the

records available it is found that firstly on 10.01.2012, the appeal was fixed for

hearing but none was present on behalf of assessee and hence the same was

adjourned to 04.04.2012.       Again on 04.04.2012 none appeared on behalf of

assessee because the C.A. of assessee who was attending this matter was out of

town and at the request of the assessee the same was adjourned to 21.06.2012. As

the bench did not functioned on 21.06.2012, the same was adjourned to

25.10.2012. In view of these facts, it appears that assessee is not interested in

prosecuting this appeal. Hence this appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed

for non- prosecution. In this regard, we are supported by the decision in the case

of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 460 (relevant pages

477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that:


"The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it".

3.    In this regard we are also supported by the decision in the case of CIT Vs

Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del).






4.    In view of the above, and also considering the provision of Rule 19 of the

Appellate Tribunal rules, 1963, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
                                         3
                                                            ITA No. : 2279/Mum/2011
                                                              M/s. SDL Steel Pvt. Ltd.




5.    In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.



      Order pronounced in the open court on 25th October, 2012


               sd/-                                  sd/-
         (D. MANMOHAN)                           (RAJENDRA)
         VICE PRESIDENT                      ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Place: Mumbai
Dated: 25th October, 2012

Rasika


Copy to:
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. The Commissioner of Income Tax 1, Mumbai
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai
5. The Departmental Representative, Bench `E' Mumbai

//TRUE COPY//                                               BY ORDER



                                        ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Our Team

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions