M/s. Surya Kiran Build Trade (P) Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2831/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7433 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 05-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BARNWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. A. T. VARKEY, JM ITA NO. 2831/DEL/2014 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2004 - 05 ITA NO. 4131/DEL/2010 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2004 - 05 M/S S URYA KIRAN BUILD TRADE (P) LTD., 161, VASANT ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI VS ITO, WARD - 9(4), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AADCS0982M ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. ANIMA BARNWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 05.01.201 6 DA TE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06 .01.2016 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S DATED 31.01 .2014 & 16.06.2010 OF LD. CIT(A) - XII , NEW DELHI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 . 2. DURI NG THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOU RNMENT WAS SOUGHT I N SPITE OF THE FACT THAT DATE OF HEARIN G WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26.11.2015 AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE . IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. ITA NO .2831/ /DEL /2014 ITA NO.4131/DEL/2010 SURYA KI RAN BUILD TRADE (P) 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 DORMIENTIBU S 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 A T 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 AT PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. ITA NO .2831/ /DEL /2014 ITA NO.4131/DEL/2010 SURYA KI RAN BUILD TRADE (P) LTD. 3 7. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL S FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 8 . IN THE RESUL T, APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 06 /01/2016) SD/ - SD/ - ( A. T. VARKEY ) ( N. K. SAINI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 06 /01/2016 *SUBODH * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR