Sh. Shamsher Jang Bahadur, Hoshiarpur V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Jalandhar

ITA 442/ASR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5687 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIK CHAND

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.L. KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.442 & 443(ASR)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 & 2002-03 PAN :ABWPB7485M SH. SHAMSHER JANG BAHADUR, VS. THE DY. COMMR. OF IN COME-TAX, HOSHIARPUR. CENTRAL CIR.1, JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. AMRIK CHAND, DR ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM, THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-I, LUDHIANA, DATED 20.08.2010, PASSED UNDER SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO I N SHORT THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 & 2002-03. 2. THE ABOVE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 20 TH JUNE, 2010. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED AD POST ON 01.06.2011. THE SAID NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK UNDELIVERED WIT H THE REMARKS LEFT WITHOUT ADDRESS RETURNED TO SENDER. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE REVISE FORM NO.36 CONTAINING NEW ADDRESS, AS CONTEMPLATED IN TH E PRACTICE NOTE DATED 22 ND FEB.,2011 ISSUED WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE HONBL E PRESIDENT. THUS, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PRO SECUTION OF THE PRESENT 2 APPEALS AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED ON T HIS GROUND ITSELF. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SL EEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIG ILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACT S AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DE LHI BENCH, IN THE CASE OF C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD; 38-ITD-320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (1997) 223-ITR-480, THE APPEALS ARE DISMI SSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESS E STAND DISMISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20TH JUNE, 2011. (H.L. KARWA) (MEHAR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:20TH JUNE, 2011 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE: SH. SHAMSHER JANG BAHADUR, HOSHIARPUR . 2. THE DCIT, CC-1, JALANDHAR. 3. THE CIT(A)-1 LUDHIANA. 4. THE CIT, 5. THE SR DR, ASR TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH : AMRITSAR. 3