Mr Pushpinder Tuli, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4739/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 98076 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 15-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V R SONBHADRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI , JM ITA NO S . 4739 /DEL/2012 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007 - 08 PUSHPINDER TULI, A - 15, OLD Q UARTERS, RAMESH NAGAR NEW DELHI VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 27(2), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A AEPT9809J ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. V. R. SONBHADRA , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 15 .12 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 15 .12 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 2 2.06.2012 OF CIT(A) - XXIV , NEW DELHI. 2. ON EARLIER DATES OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY A DJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD , WHICH HAS NOT YET BEEN RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY. WE FIND THAT ON EARLIER OCCASION, WHEN THE CASE WAS LISTED THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED AT THE R EQUEST OF THE ASSE SSEE . IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. ITA NO S.4739 /DE L /201 2 PUSHPINDER TULI 2 3. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT . CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 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. SI MILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HON BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE 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 REMAINED 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 PAG E 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. ITA NO S.4739 /DE L /201 2 PUSHPINDER TULI 3 7. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 /12 /2015) SD/ - SD/ - (BEENA PILLAI ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15 / 12 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR