Sh. Swaran Singh Sandhu, Ferozepur V. The Income-tax Officer, Ferozepur

ITA 427/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0704 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.427(ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 PAN: AGLPS1210P SH. SWARAN SINGH SANDHU VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR. WARD III(1), FEROZEPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH.UMESH TAKYAR, DR DATE OF HEARING: 02/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02/06/2016 ORDER PER A.D.JAIN, JM: THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2005-06, AGAINST THE ORDER, DATED 11.03.2014, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), BATHINDA 2. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR TODAY, I.E., 2.06.2016 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON 27.04.2016. AS PER RECORD, THE SAME HAS NOT RETURNED UNSERVED. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE, NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED, NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT APPEAL AND TH E SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED ON THIS GROUND ITSELF. THE LAW ASSISTS TH OSE WHO ARE VIGILANT 2 AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRI NCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBU S, 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 MAD HYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLK AR VS. CWT (1997) 223-ITR-480, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL B E FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER A ND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS, ETC., THIS ORDER SHALL BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02/0 5/ 2016. SD/- SD/- (T.S. KAPOOR) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER /SKR/ DATED: 02/06/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SWARAN SINGH SANDHU, FEROZEPUR 2. THE ITO FEROZEPUR. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR. 3