M/s. Spice Realtors Ltd., Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3053/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 82008 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Section: 37

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO. - 3 053 /DEL/201 3 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2008 - 09) M/S SPICE REALTORS LTD. VS. ITO D - 276, GANGA VIHAR, WARD - 9(2), DELHI - 110094 NEW DELHI. PAN: AA KCS5555P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: - NONE REVENUE BY: - SH. B. R. R. KUMAR , SR.DR. DATE OF HEARING: 26.11.2014 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON: 26.11.2014 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11 .0 2 .201 3 OF LD. CIT (APPEALS) - XII , NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJ OURNMENT WAS S OUGHT. E ARLIER ALSO, W HEN THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 15 TH MAY 2014 , NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE FOR HEARING OF TODAY WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 4 TH SEPTEMBER 2014, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY WITH. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. 2 3 . THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WEL L 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 IN STANCE 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 HI GH 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. 3 7 . SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26/11/2014. SD/ - SD/ - (A. T. VARKEY) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 26 /11/2014 *AK VERMA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR