Vikramadity Singh, Siliguri V. I.T.O Wd - 2(2),Siliguri, Siliguri

ITA 1170/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5089 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NOS. 1170 & 1171/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 1170 & 1171/KOL/ 2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 VIKRAMADITYA SINGH,................................ ....................APPELLANT S/O. LT. BALDEO SINGH, HYDERPARA, SILIGURI-734 001 [PAN: AJSPS 6048 R] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ .............................RESPONDENT WARD-2(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MATIGARA, SILIGURI, WEST BENGAL APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 29, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 29, 2016 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP :- THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE TWO SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS), SILIGURI, BOTH DATED 04.03.2013 WHEREBY HE CONFIRME D THE PENALTIES OF RS.68,292/- AND RS.61,041/- IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05 RESPECTIVELY. 2. IN THIS CASE, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED TODAY, I.E. ON 29.02.2016. THE NOT ICE OF THE SAID HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST WITH A/D HA S BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES UNSERVED WITH A REMARK ADDR ESSEE EXPIRED, HENCE RETURNED TO SENDER. IT IS SEEN THAT THE INTIMATION OF THE DEATH OF THE I.T.A. NOS. 1170 & 1171/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 PAGE 2 OF 3 ASSESSEE IS NOT PLACED ON RECORD. NO EFFORTS HAVE A LSO BEEN TAKEN TO BRING THE LEGAL HEIRS ON RECORD SO AS TO ENABLE THE REGIS TRY TO SERVE THE NOTICE OF HEARING AFTER NECESSARY VERIFICATION. THE REGIST RY HAS ALSO POINTED OUT CERTAIN DEFECTS IN THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE, BUT THE SAME HAVE NOT BEEN RECTIFIED EVEN AFTER THE COMMUNICATION OF THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE. KEEPING IN VIEW ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE OR HIS SUCCESSORS ARE NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THESE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . 3. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT T HOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WEL L KNOWN DICTUM - VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMIENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIENT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WAS CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS.- MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADE SH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.- C.W.T . REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE TREAT THESE APPEALS AS UNADMITTED AND DISMI SS THE SAME FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FEBRUARY 29, 2016. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 29 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) VIKRAMADITYA SINGH, S/O. LT. BALDEO SINGH, HYDERPARA, SILIGURI-734 001 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MATIGARA, SILIGURI, WEST BENGAL (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), SILIGURI (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA I.T.A. NOS. 1170 & 1171/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 PAGE 3 OF 3 (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.