IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
`A' BENCH AHMEDABAD
(BEFORE SHRI G. C. GUPTA, VP AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM)
ITA No.776/Ahd/2010
A. Y.: 2006-07
Shri Vasantlal A. Doriwala, Vs The A. C. I. T., Circle-5,
8, Hajoori Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan,
Zampa Bazar, Surat Majura Gate,
P. A. No. ACCPD 6390 C Sutat
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by None
Respondent by Shri Rohit Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing: 02-07-2012
Date of pronouncement: 02 -07-2012
ORDER
PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY: This appeal filed by the assessee
is directed against the order of the learned CIT(A)-IV, Surat in Appeal
No.CAS-III/133/2008-09 dated 24-11-2009, for assessment year
2006-07.
2. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the
assessee despite service of notice. On perusal of the records we find
that this case was first fixed for hearing on 12-01-12 and the same
was adjourned to 19-03-12 at the request of the learned AR seeking
time for preparation of relevant paper book. On 19-03-12, the learned
AR again sought for more time for preparation of paper book and
accordingly, the case was again adjourned to 10-05-12. On 10-05-12
ITA No.776/Ahd/2010 (AY 2006-07) 2
Shri Vasantlal A. Doriwala Vs ACIT, Circle-5, Surat
also the learned AR sought for adjournment for the same reason.
The case was ultimately adjourned to 02-07-2012. At the time of
hearing on 02-07-12, neither the learned AR appeared before us nor
was any adjournment application filed. From the above conduct of the
assessee, it is evident that the assessee is no more interested in
prosecuting his appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
CIT Vs B. N. Bhattachargee and others, 118 ITR 461 observed that
preferring an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon'ble M. P.
High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs
Commissioner of Wealth Tax, 223 ITR 480 dismissed the reference
filed at the instance of the assessee for default and for not taking
necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the assessee in the
present circumstance, we are of the view that the assessee is not
interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, following the order of
ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38
ITD 320 (Del) and the decisions cited above, we hereby dismiss the
appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution.
3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 02-07-2012
Sd/- Sd/-
(G. C. GUPTA) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY)
VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Lakshmikant Deka/-
ITA No.776/Ahd/2010 (AY 2006-07) 3
Shri Vasantlal A. Doriwala Vs ACIT, Circle-5, Surat
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT concerned
4. The CIT(A) concerned
5. The DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. Guard File
BY ORDER
Dy. Registrar, ITAT, Ahmedabad
1. Date of dictation: No Dictation: Applied Multiplan
2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the
Dictating Member: 02-07-12 other Member: 03-07-12
3. Date on which approved draft comes to the Sr. P. S./P.S.: 03-07-12
4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the
Dictating Member for pronouncement: N.A.
5. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: 03-07-12
6. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk: 03-07-12
7. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk:
8. The date on which the file goes to the
Assistant Registrar for signature on the order:
9. Date of Despatch of the Order:
|
