District Education Officer UT, Chandigarh V. ITO, TDS-I, Chandigarh

ITA 1281/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7523 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-07-2018
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 31-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1281/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, UT, VS. THE ITO, SECTOR 19-B, CHANDIGARH WARD-1, CDG TAN PTLD11220G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. MANOJ KUMAR, SR DR DATE OF HEARING : 03.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.07.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSE SSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-1, G URGAON [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] DATED 21.7.20 17 . 2. NO ONE HAS COME FOR APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING FOLL OWING OBSERVATIONS WERE MADE:- THE CASE WAS EARLIER FIXED ON 01/01/2018. HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED AS THE LD. A.M. WAS ON LEAVE AND AT THE VERBAL REQUEST OF ASSESSEES COUNSEL AS HE COUL D NOT PRODUCE THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO GATHER THE TRUE FACTS OF THE CASE. TODAY, THE LD. COUNSEL COUL D NOT PRODUCE THOSE DOCUMENTS DESPITE SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THE SAME. THE REPLY OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS EVASIVE. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTEREST ED IN EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. HENCE, LONG DATE IS G IVEN TO ITA NO. 1281/CHD/2017- DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHANDIGARH 2 ENABLE THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE RELEVANT DOCUMEN TS REGARDING THE FACTUAL ASPECTS OF THE CASE. CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 3/7/2017 TODAY NEITHER THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN FUR NISHED NOR HAS ANYONE COME PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PERUSING HIS APPEAL. THE LAW AI DS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. TH IS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL-KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENT IBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING I N VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN IN DIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL 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 NO T 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 ABSENT AND T HERE 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 477- 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF AP PEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. ITA NO. 1281/CHD/2017- DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHANDIGARH 3 6. SO, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 03.07.2018 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR