Pawan Kumar Singla, Panchkula V. DCIT, CC-I, Chandigarh

ITA 12/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1221 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDEEP GOYAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 11 & 12/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S PAWAN KUMAR SINGLA, VS. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIR CLE-1, L/H LATE SHRI BRIJ LAL SINGLA, CHANDIGARH HOUSE NO. 105, SECTOR 8, PANCHKULA PAN NO. ACBPS0996C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. JAGDEEP GOYAL, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 28.08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2018 ORDER PER BENCH: THE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE AS SESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (A)-3, GURGAON [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] DATED 31.10.2 017 RESPECTIVELY . 2. NO ONE HAS PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PERUSING ITS APPEALS. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE V IGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL-KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB 2 ITA NOS.11 & 12/CHD/2018- SH. PAWAN KUMAR SINGHLA, PANCHKULA VENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VI EW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA L TD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), WE TREAT THESE APPEALS AS UNADMITTED. 3. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADH YA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLK AR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. SIMILARLY, HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 RE TURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED AB SENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 4 77-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO O F APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. SO, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THESE APPEALS FOR NON-PROSECUTION . 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMI SSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 04.09.2018 RKK 3 ITA NOS.11 & 12/CHD/2018- SH. PAWAN KUMAR SINGHLA, PANCHKULA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR