Arun Tumdu Chaudhari, V. ITO, Wd 3(1), Dhule,

ITA 333/PUN/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3160 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEENU MALHOTRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRAKUMAR YADAV AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ITA NO. 333/PN/09 (A.Y 2005-06) ARUN TUMDU CHAUDHARI HOTEL BHUSHAN RESIDENCY GAT NO. 496/21/2/2 MOHIDA SHIVAR SHAHADA 425409 MAHARASHTRA PAN NO. ACXPC5213E .... APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 3(1), DHULE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NEENU MALHOTRA ORDER PER D KARUNAKARA RAO AM THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE EM ANATES FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-I, NASHIK, DATED 03/02/2009. 2. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 03-11-2010, HOWE VER, ON THIS DATE OF HEARING NO ONE APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT THOUGH IT WAS PROPERLY COMMUNICATED. FROM THE ORDER SHEET IT IS EVIDENT THAT IN THE PAST, NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES WAS GRANTED, BUT THIS APPEAL ALWAYS REM AINED UNATTENDED. IT IS QUITE AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION THAT IN THE EXPECTATION OF THIS APPEAL BE REPRESENTED PROPERLY, THE REGISTRY KEPT ON SENDING NOTICES BUT ALWA YS REMAINED UNATTENDED. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIG ILANTIBUS, NO DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. IN SUCH CASES, THE COURTS/TRIBUNA L HAVE INHERENT POWERS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION AS HELD BY HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009 AND ALSO FOLLOWING RATIO OF TH E DECISION LAID DOWN IN THE ITA NO. 333/PN/09 A.Y 2005-05 PAGE 2 OF 2 CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT) LIMITED, 38 ITD 320, AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE AR E CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. WE THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 3. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH NOVEMBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRAKUMAR YADAV) (D.KARUNAKAR A RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R PUNE DATED THE 16 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 R COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT(A)-I, NASHIK 4. CIT-I, NASHIK 5. D.R. ITAT B BENCH BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T PUNE