Sh. Sanjeev Bharadwaj, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 483/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86204 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR AMA RVEER SINGH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.483 TO 485 /CHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2003-04,2005-06 & 2006-07) SHRI SANJEEV BHARDWAJ, VS. THE A.C.I.T 553/1/F, GILL ROAD, CIRCLE V, MILLER GANJ, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: ABJPB9835E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : DR.AMARVEER SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.03.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. : ALL THE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINS T THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 20.1.2014 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2003-04, DATED 17.1.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-0 6 AND DATED 17.1.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE RECORD REVEALS THAT ON EARLIER OCCASIONS THE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST FOR HEARING OF THE APPEALS BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. THE APPEALS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 25.3.2015 AND NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE CORRECT AD DRESS GIVEN 2 IN THE APPEAL PAPERS. THE REGISTERED COVER, HOWEVE R, RETURNED WITH THE REMARK THAT DESPITE VISITING SEVERAL TIME S THE ADDRESSEE IS NOT AVAILABLE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AVOIDED TO RECEIVE THE NOTICE. NO OTHER ADDRESS IS GIVEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVICE. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THA T THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE A PPEALS. THEREFORE, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE T O BE DISMISSED. THE LAWS AID THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THE PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED AS WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JUR A SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., WE TREAT THESE APPEALS AS UNA DMITTED. 3. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY HON'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V CW AT 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. 4. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS CIT (2008) 296 ITR 4 95 RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FR OM THE ASSESSEE. 3 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V B.N. BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER 118 ITR 461 A T PAGE 477-78 HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FIL ING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN T HE CASES CITED (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 25 TH MARCH, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH