Smt. Shakuntala Devi, Muzaffarnagar V. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 4530/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4541 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI. G. D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T .A. NO. 4530/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 SMT. SHAKUNTALA DEVI L/H, OF LATE SHRI RAGHUVIR SINGH 869/ 1, RAINBOW VIHAR MEERUT ROAD MUZAFFARNAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2) MUZAFFARNAGAR TAN/PAN: AGNPS3451Q (APP LIC ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP LIC ANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ATIQ AHMED, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 30 08 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 09 201 7 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31/3/2014 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR FOR QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S. 148 READ WITH 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 . 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH ON 30/8/2017 . AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH R EGISTERED POST, BUT THE SAME WAS RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK ADDRESSEE S HOUSE IS PERMANENTLY LOCKED . EVEN NO APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT INTIMATED ANY CHANGE IN ADDRESS. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO I.T.A. NO.4530/DEL/2014 2 SLEEP UPO N THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM ' VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUNT '. 3. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, HOLD THA T THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD, WE PLACE RELIANCE UPON FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: - 1. CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) 4. CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC). 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5/9/2017. SD/ - SD/ - [G.D. AGRAWAL ] [ AMIT SHUKLA ] PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 5 TH SEPTEMBER , 2017 JJ: COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APP ELLA NT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR I.T.A. NO.4530/DEL/2014 3 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7. UPLOADED ON 8 . FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 9 . DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10 . DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 1 1 . DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.