Jayantilal Ramanlal Tailor v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle–3, Surat
[Citation -2016-LL-1018-53]

Citation 2016-LL-1018-53
Appellant Name Jayantilal Ramanlal Tailor
Respondent Name Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle–3, Surat
Court ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 18/10/2016
Assessment Year 2008-09
Judgment View Judgment
Bot Summary: It is noticed that when the matter came up for hearing today i.e. 18.10.2016, none appeared for and on behalf of the assessee. The notice of hearing sent to the assessee has come back un-served with the postal remark left. No change of address has been intimated by the assessee to the Registry. 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. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.


I.T.A.No.1411/Ahd/2013 Assessment year:2008-09 Page 1 of 2 IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD C BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Mahavir Prasad JM] I.T.A. No.1411/Ahd/2013 Assessment year: 2008-09 Jayantilal Ramanlal Tailor Appellant 14, Shivangi Bunglow, Near Ambica Niketan, Athwalines, Surat 395 001. [PAN: ABEPT 6213B] Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3, Surat. Respondent Appearances by: None for appellant Prasoon Kabra for respondent Date of concluding hearing : 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncing order : 18/10/2016 ORDER Per Pramod Kumar AM: This is appeal filed by assessee appellant against order of ld. CIT(A)-IV, Surat dated 19.03.2013 for Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. It is noticed that when matter came up for hearing today i.e. 18.10.2016, none appeared for and on behalf of assessee. Earlier also case was fixed and was adjourned. notice of hearing sent to assessee has come back un-served with postal remark left . No change of address has been intimated by assessee to Registry. From this, it is reasonable to infer that assessee is not serious to pursue its I.T.A.No.1411/Ahd/2013 Assessment year:2008-09 Page 2 of 2 case. Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed reference filed by assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering above, it appears that assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss appeal filed by assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in open court today on 18 th day of October, 2016. Sd/- Sd/- Mahavir Prasad Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Dated: 18 th day of October, 2016. Copies to: (1) appellant (2) respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) Guard File By order etc Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad Jayantilal Ramanlal Tailor v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle–3, Surat
Report Error