M/s TS Alloys Ltd, Bhubaneswar V. CIT, Sambalpur

ITA 333/CTK/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86439 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VENKATRAMANI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 333 /CTK/2013 : (ASST. YEAR : 2008 - 09) M/S. T.S. ALLOYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. RAWMET FERROUS PVT. LTD.) N - 3/24, IRC VILLAGE, NAYAPALLI, BHUBANESWAR PAN : A ACCR7005H (APPELLANT) VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJASWA VIHAR, BHUBANESWAR . (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : S. VENKATRAMANI , DR DATE OF HEARING : 29/0 1 /201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02 /0 3 /201 5 O R D E R PER P.K. BANSAL : 1. THE ABOVE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT, BHUBANESWAR DT. 25 . 3 .201 3 FOR A.Y 200 8 - 0 9 . THE APPEAL WAS PREVIOUSLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23. 4.2014 AND 20.10.2014 AND ON BOTH THE OCCASIONS W AS ADJOURNED AS NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. 29.1.2015 . HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE LAWS ASSIST THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL - KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V. 2 ITA NO. 333/CTK/2013 (A.Y : 2008 - 09) MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. AS ALSO IN 223 ITR 480 (M.P) IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HO L KAR V. CWT, WE TREAT THE APPEAL AS NOT ADMITTED. 3. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF 38 ITD 320 READ WITH RULE 24 & 25 WITH 19 OF THE ITA RULES, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR DEFAULT SINCE WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT WILLING TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. OUR VI EW GETS SUPPORT FROM THE JUDGEMENT OF 255 ITR 467 (AP) AND 265 ITR 252. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN PURSUANCE OF RULE 34(4) OF ITAT RULES, 1963 BY PUTTING ON NOTICE BOARD OF THE BENCH AT CUTTACK ON 02 / 0 3 /2015 . SD/ - (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 02 /0 3 / 201 5 *SSL* COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER ,