Shri Mohan Goel (HUF), Haldwani V. ITO, Haldwani

ITA 286/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 65265 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGI SENIOR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.286/DEL./2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) SHRI MOHAN GOEL (HUF), VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2, SADAR BAZAR, HALDWANI. HALDWANI, DISTT. NAINITAL (UTTARAKHAND). (PAN : AAAHM0227R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI R.S. NEGI, SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF CIT (APPEALS)-II, DEHRADUN DATED 19.11.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 005-06. 2. TODAY I.E. ON 08.08.2012 WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLE D ON BOARD, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE HAVE ALSO NOTICED T HAT THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED ON THE EARLIER DATES OF HEARING ALSO, I.E . 25.03.2011, 25.11.2011, 09.04.2012 AND 13.06.2012, AT THE REQUEST OF THE AS SESSEES COUNSEL. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSEC UTING THE APPEAL; HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE UNADMI TTED AND DISMISSED, FOR NON- ITA NO.286/DEL./2009 2 PROSECUTION. THE LAWS ASSIST THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AND K EEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA, REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TU KOJI RAO HOLKAR, REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL IN LIMINE. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS ETC. FOR NON-COMPLIANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS ETC., THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2012 AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (U.B.S. BEDI) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 08.08.2012 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-II, DEHRADUN. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.