Sh Des Raj Institute of Management, Ferozepur V. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bathinda

ITA 366/ASR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 36620914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIK CHAND

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 366(ASR)/2011 PAN: PABTD3279M M/S. DEV RAJ INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT VS.THE COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX, AND TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, BATHINDA. FEROZEPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY:SH. AMRIK CHAND, DR DATE OF HEARING :13/03/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:13/03/2012 ORDER PERBENCH; THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAIN ST THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT, BATHINDA DATED 18.04.2011. 2. THE ABOVE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 13 TH MARCH, 2012. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED AD P OST ON 09.02.2012. FURTHER, THE REGISTRY HAS ALSO ISSUED DEFECT MEMO D ATED 30.08.2011 TO THE ASSESSEE, INDICATING THE FOLLOWING DEFECT: 2 ORIGINAL CHALLAN OF TRIBUNAL FEE IS NOT FILED. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ORIGINAL CHALLAN OF TRIB UNAL FEE TILL DATE. THUS, KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THE PRESENT APP EAL AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED ON THIS GROUND ITSELF. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIP LE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN M IND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND B Y RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCH, IN THE CASE OF C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD; 38- ITD-320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CW T (1997) 223-ITR-480, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. W E ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13TH MARCH, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 13TH MARCH , 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE: M/S. DEV RAJ INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, FEROZEPUR. 2. THE CIT, BHATINDA. 3. THE SR DR, ITAT, ASR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER