Sh. Ghansham Rathore, Gwalior V. Dy. CIT., Circle-III, Gwalior

ITA 149/AGR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2357 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBE R AND MRS. ANNAPURNA MEHROTRA, ACCOUN TANT MEMBER ITA NO. 149/AGRA/2014 ASSTT. YEAR : 2010-11 GHANSHAM RATHORE, VS. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-III, HOTEL SANGEETA, LAXMI GANJ, GWALIOR. GWALIOR[PAN: AEVPR 0726 H] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 27.01.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.01.2016. ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 07.04.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DATE OF HEARING THROUGH REGISTERED POST, BUT THE SAME RETURNED UN-SERVED WITH THE REMARK AD DRESSEE IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. NO OTHER ADDRESS HAS BEEN GI VEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVICE. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KN OWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT. SIMILAR VIE W HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO ITA NO.149/AGRA/2014 2 HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480). THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (11 8 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. THUS, KEEPING IN VIE W 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) AND ALSO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, WE TREAT THIS AP PEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITH LIBERTY T O ASSESSEE THAT HE MAY MOVE APPLICATION TO RECALL THIS ORDER ON SATISFYING THE TRIBUNAL WITH THE SUFFICIENT CAUSE WHICH PREVENTED HIM TO APPEAR ON T HE DATE OF HEARING. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 27.01.2016. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA MEHROTRA) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 27 TH JANUARY, 2016 *AKS/- COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR