M/s. AXA Business Services Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 1424/BANG/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 51278 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-02-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G V GOPALA RAO

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1424(BANG)/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) M/S. AXA BUSINESS SERVICES PVT. LTD., NO.16/2, PRESTIGE.COM RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. PAN : AAACA5310J VS. APPELLANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), BANGALORE. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.V.GOPALA RAO. DATE OF HEARING: 29-09-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29-09-2011 O R D E R PER N.K.SAINI, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22-10-2010 OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-I, BANGALORE, RE LATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THIS BE NCH OF THE TRIBUNAL TODAY THE 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF ITA 1424(BANG)/2010 PAGE 2 OF 3 THE FACT THAT NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSE E BY REGISTERED POST WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD PLACED ON RECORD. EVEN NO APP LICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. TH IS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FA CTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA 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 HOLKAR 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 T AKING 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) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FR OM THE ASSESSEE. ITA 1424(BANG)/2010 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-78) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FI LING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 SD/- SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.K. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER EKS COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGIST RAR, ITAT, BANGALORE