Jai Janta Trading Co., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3414/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 97567 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K JAIN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI , JM ITA NO. 3414 /DEL/2011 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007 - 08 JAI J ANTA TRADING CO. , 2730, 1 ST FLOOR, NAYA BAZAR, DELHI - 110006 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 29(1), DRUM SHAPED BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A AAFJ2040H ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. S. K. JAIN , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.10 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.10 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 1 5.06 .2011 OF LD. CIT (A) - XXV , NEW DELHI . 2. EARLIER THIS CASE WAS DISPOSED OFF VIDE ORDER DATED 10.01.2012. T HEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE MOVED MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RECALLING THE EX - PARTE ORDER AND VIDE ORDER DATED 04.09.2015 IN M.A. NO. 173/DEL/2012, T HE ORDER DATED 10.01.2012 WAS RECALLED AND THE DATE OF HEARING FOR TODAY I.E . 19.10.2015 WAS ANNOUNCED ON THE SAID DATE IN THE OPEN COURT , THIS FACT I S MENTIONED IN THE ORDER DATED 04.09.2015 . HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. IT, THEREFORE, ITA NO . 3414 /DEL /201 1 JAI JANTA TRADING CO. 2 APPEARS THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. 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 DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT . CONSIDERING THE FAC TS 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 HO N 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 AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS F OR 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 REF ERENCE 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 ITA NO . 3414 /DEL /201 1 JAI JANTA TRADING CO. 3 THE APPEAL DOE S NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 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 D ISMISSED. ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 19/10 /2015 ) SD/ - SD/ - (BEENA A. PILLAI ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 19/10 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. A PPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR