Black Mountain Looms (India), Agra V. CIT, Agra

ITA 235/AGR/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7061 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HOMI RAJVANSH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.235/AGR/2009 ASST. YEAR: 2004-05 BLACK MOUNTAIN LOOMS (INDIA), VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 21/49, FREEGANJ, RANGE-I, AGRA. AGRA. (PAN : AACFB 8640 B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ARVIND BANSAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HOMI RAJVANSH, CIT D.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL ON 28.05. 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2009 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT-I, AGRA, WHI CH CAME UP BEFORE THE BENCH ON 03.02.2011 AND, ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 21.04.2011. THIS DATE WAS NOTED BY SHRI SUNIL KUMA R. ON 21.04.2011, THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT REQUESTING THAT HE WAS OUT OF STATION AND HENCE UNA BLE TO ARGUE THE APPEAL. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNME NT AND FOUND THAT THE REASON MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION IS NOT PLAUSIBL E ONE FOR ADJOURNING THE CASE. THEREFORE, WE REJECT THE SAME. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE 2 PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS A.R. ARE INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE. THE LAW ASSISTS ONLY THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT OF THEIR RIGHTS, AND NOT THOSE WHO SLE EP OVER THEM. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AS WELL AS THE DECISIONS BY THE TRIBUNAL AS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED, 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND BY THE HIGHER COURTS, AS IN THE CAS E OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), WE TREAT THE AS SESSEES APPEAL AS UN- ADMITTED, AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE WITH LIBER TY TO THE ASSESSEE THAT IF THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE, IT CAN MOVE AN APPLICATION FOR RECALLING THE PRESENT APPEAL AND ARGUE THE MATTER W ITHOUT TAKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED IN LIMINE. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.04.2011 ). SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 21 ST APRIL, 2011 PBN/* 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY