M/s. Brushman (India) Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT (OSD), New Delhi

ITA 1760/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86734 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 23-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y KAKKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. C. M. GARG , JM ITA NO. 1760/DEL/2012 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008 - 09 M/S BRUSHMAN (INDIA) LTD ., B - 95/3, NARAINA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE - I, NEW DELHI VS ACIT (OSD), CIT - I, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AA ACB0378D ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : Y. KAKKAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 23 .02 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 .02 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2012 OF LD. CIT(A) - VI , NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NO BODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . TH E NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED ON 20.10 .2014 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH HAD NOT BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY . THE REGISTRY HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THIS APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 66 DAYS. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE I S NOT INTEREST ED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. ITA NO. 1760 /DEL /2012 BRUSHMAN (INDIA) LTD. 2 3. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT . CONSIDERING THE FACTS 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. 4 . SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HON BLE MADHYA 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 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. 5. SIMILARLY, HON BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 6. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 A T PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. ITA NO. 1760 /DEL /2012 BRUSHMAN (INDIA) LTD. 3 7. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 8. IN THE RESUL T, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 /02 /2015 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( C. M GARG ) (N. K. SA INI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 23 /02 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR