ABDUL RAHIM BHATT, SRINAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1), SRINAGAR

ITA 398/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5729 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 19-02-2018
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S NEGI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. R.S.SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.398(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 7-08 LATE ABDUL RAHIM BHAT (GUPKARI) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS: SH. IMRAN RAHIM & SH. UMAR RAHIM. C/O AHM & CO. (CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS) 3 RD FLOOR, BABA BUILDING-II RESIDENCY ROAD, SRINAGAR, J&K 190001. PAN:ATIPB2163L VS. ITO, WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR, J&K(JAMMU) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. S.S. NEGI (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 19.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21.02.2018 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE/AP PELLANT, ON FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.03.201 7 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), J&K, JAMMU, IN APPEAL NO.193/2015-16, BY WH ICH THE LD. CIT(A) ON NON-PROSECUTION DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIM INE. FROM THE ORDER IT REFLECTS THAT SIX OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN GIVE N TO THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUING THE NOTICES FROM TIME TO TIME ON THE ADDRESS GIVE N BY THE APPELLANT IN FORM NO.35, HOWEVER, ON NONE OF THE DATES, THE ASSE SSEE NEITHER ATTENDED THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS NOR FILED ANY ADJO URNMENT APPLICATION OR ITA NO.398 /ASR/2017 (A.Y.2007-08) LATE ABDUL BHAT (GUPKARI) VS. ITO 2 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND IN THAT EVENTUALITY DESPITE GIVI NG SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. THE REFORE, HE WAS PLEASED TO DISMISS THE APPEAL. 2. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDER IMPUGNED HEREIN. THE APPELLANT DID NOT BOTHER HIMSELF TO APPE AR AND CO-ORDINATE WITH APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS EVEN AFTER AFFORDING SIX OPPORTU NITIES. ALTHOUGH THE INSTANT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN ORDER TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLE THAT LAW DOES NOT ASSIST THE PERSON WHO IS INACTIVE AND SLEEPS OVER HIS RIGHTS BY ALLOWING THEM WHEN CHALLENGED OR DISPUTED TO REMAIN DORMANT, WITHOUT ASSERTING THEM IN A COURT OF L AW. THE, PRINCIPLE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THIS RULE IS EXPRESSED IN THE MAXI M VIGILANTIBUS , NON DORMIENTIBUS , JURA SUBVENIUNT (LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS), BUT EVEN A VIGILANT LITIGANT IS PRONE TO COMMIT MISTAKES. AS THE APHORISM TO ERR IS HUMAN AND IS MORE A PRACTICAL NOTION OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THAN AN ABSTRACT PH ILOSOPHY, THE UNINTENTIONAL LAPSE ON THE PART OF A LITIGANT SHOULD NOT NORMALLY CAUSE THE DOORS OF THE JUDICATURE PERMANENTLY CLOSED BEFORE HIM. THE EFFORT OF THE COURT SHOULD NOT BE ONE OF FINDING MEANS TO PULL DOWN THE SHUTTERS OF ADJUDICATORY JURISDICTION BEFORE A PARTY WHO SEEKS JUST ICE, ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MISTAKE COMMITTED BY HIM, BUT TO SEE WHETHER IT IS POSSIB LE TO ENTERTAIN HIS GRIEVANCE IF IT IS GENUINE , THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE ON MER IT, HENCE WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE AND PROPER TO REMAND BACK THE INSTANT CASE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH ON MERITS , WHILE AFFORDING PR OPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT, I N ORDER TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ITA NO.398 /ASR/2017 (A.Y.2007-08) LATE ABDUL BHAT (GUPKARI) VS. ITO 3 WE ALSO FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE/APPEL LANT TO EXTEND ITS FULL CO-OPERATION AND PARTICIPATION IN THE APPELL ATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS AND WHEN REQUIRED AND IN CASE OF FURTHER DEFAULT, THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE SUBJECTED TO ANY LENIENCY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 .02.2018. SD/- SD/- (R.S.SYAL) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:21.02.2018 /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) LATE ABDUL RAHIM BHAT (GUPKARI) THROUGH LEG AL HEIRS, J&K JAMMU. (2) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1) (3) THE CIT(A). J&K, JAMMU. (4) THE CIT CONCERNED. (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER