M/s. Maliks Co., V. The JCIT, Ferozepur

ITA 221/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 22120914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 220 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 PAN: AACFM7943G M/S MALIKS CO. 73, JHOKE VS. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, ROAD, FEROZEPUR CANTT. FEROZEPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND I.T.A. NO. 221(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 PAN: AACFM7943G M/S MALIKS CO. 73, JHOKE VS. J.C.I.T., RANGE-3, ROAD, FEROZEPUR CANTT. FEROZEPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. MAHAVIR SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 30.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.01.2014 ORDER PER BENCH 1. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AFORESAID TWO APPEALS AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), BATHINDA, EACH 19.02.2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 & 2009-10. 2. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR TODAY I.E. 30.01.2014 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD BUT DESPITE THIS, NEITHER THE ASSE SSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION F OR ADJOURNMENT. THUS, 2 I.T.A. NOS. 220 & 221(ASR)/2013 WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERES TED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTERS IN DISPUTE. THE LAWS AID THOS E WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. T HE PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED AS WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 (2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN 38 I TD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 3. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY HON'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA R V CWAT 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, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS CIT (2008) 296 I TR 495 RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE A SSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V B.N. BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER 118 ITR 46 1 AT 3 I.T.A. NOS. 220 & 221(ASR)/2013 PAGE 477-78 HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MER E FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAM E. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN T HE CASES CITED (SUPRA), WE DISMISS BOTH THE APPEALS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITH THE LIBERTY TO TH E ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY FILE APPLICATION, IF SO ADVIS ED, FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER UNDER THE LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE AFORESAID APPEALS ARE DI SMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH JANUARY, 2014 SD/./- SD/./- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30 TH JANUARY, 2014 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: M/S MALIKS CO. 73, JHOKE FEROZEPUR C ANTT. 2. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR. 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT, 5. THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.