Appeal can be treat as un-admitted for want of prosecution by the appellant

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

MUMBAI BENCH ‘I’, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A. NO.7110/M/2010

ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006

M/s. Ideal Toll Road Investment &

Operations (P) Ltd.,

101, Shree Amba Shanti Chambers,

Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E),

Mumbai – 400 057.

PAN: AAAC16404R

(Appellant)

Vs.

DCIT – 8(2), Aayakar Bhavan,

M.K. Road,

Mumbai – 400 020.

 (Respondent)

Appellant by: None

Respondent by: Shri Chandrajit Singh

Date of Hearing: 04.09.2012

Date of order: 04. 09.2012

O R D E R

Per VIJAY PAL RAO, JM:

This appeal has been filed by the assessee on 14.10.2010 against the order of the learned CIT(A)-17, Mumbai dated 14.06.2010 in relation to assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2005-06.

2. Notice of hearing was duly served upon the assessee vide RPAD on record along with the memo of defect. As the Bench did not function, the case was adjourned to 25.6.2012 and thereafter to 4.9.2012 for which both the parties were informed through notice board. However, on the date of hearing when this appeal was called upon for hearing none was present on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application for adjournment. The assessee has also not removed the defects as pointed out in the memo of defect dated 13.9.2011. It, therefore, appears to us that the assessee is not serious about pursing this appeal. Hence following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del), as also the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, reported in 223 ITR 480 (MP), and further the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 17.09.2010 in the case of M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India in Central Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009, we dismiss this appeal as unadmitted for want of prosecution by the assessee.

3. The assessee shall, however, be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recalling of this order, if prevented by sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing and taking necessary steps for removing the defects in the appeal memo.

4. In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 4th day of September, 2012.

                                                        Sd/-                            Sd/-

                                    (RAJENDRA SINGH)       (VIJAY PAL RAO)

                               ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Date: 04.09.2012

At: Mumbai

Okk

Copy to:

1. M/s. Ideal Toll Road Investment & Operations (P) Ltd.,Mum.

2. DCIT-8(2), Mumbai.

3. The CIT (A), Concerned.

4. The CIT concerned.

5. The DR “I”, Bench, ITAT, Mumbai.

6. Guard File.

// True Copy//

By Order

Assistant Registrar

ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai