Mr. Narayan Dass Nangia, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3817/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87061 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 25-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJHA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. H. S. SIDHU , JM ITA NO. 3817/DEL/2013 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2009 - 10 MR. NARAYAN DASS NANGIA, C - 151, EAST OF KAILASH, NEW DELHI - 110065 VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 39(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AA DPN9389G ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. P. DAM KANUNJHA , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.03 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.03 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2013 OF LD. CIT(A) - XX VII I , NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NO BODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . TH E NOTIC E OF HEARING ISSUED ON 26.02.2015 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH HAD NOT BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY . IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE I S NOT INTEREST ED 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, ITA NO. 3817 /DEL /2013 NARAYAN DASS NANGIA 2 VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT . CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF R ULE 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 CAS E 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 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 HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAI NED 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 APP EAL 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. ITA NO. 3817 /DEL /2013 NARAYAN DASS NANGIA 3 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25/03 /2015 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( H. S. SIDHU ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 25/03 /2015 *SUBODH* COP Y FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR