Birla Transasia Carpets, Bulandshahr V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4911/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4428 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S N
• Section: 205

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH A NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4 9 11 /DEL/2016 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 BIRLA TRANSASIA CARPETS VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1) 3 &4, INDUSTRIAL AREA NEW DELHI SIKANDRABAD BUANDSHAHR 203 205 PAN: AAACB4659B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. S.N.PANDEY, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 14 / 0 5 /2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/ 0 5 /2019 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 3 1 .03.2016 PASSED BY LD.CIT(A) - 2, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 08 - 09 . 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 14/05/2 019, INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE, NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT REQUEST RECEIVED. IT THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTER ESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. 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 T HE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE ITA 4911 /DEL/2016 AY:20 08 - 09 BIRLA TRANSASIA CARPETS VS. D CIT, CIRCLE 3(1) , NEW DELHI . 2 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. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIG H 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 PA PER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 4 T H MAY, 2019. S D / - S D / - (MAHARISHI PRASHANT) (BEENA A PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 14 TH MAY, 2019 *GMV COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT - TRUE COPY - BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BE ITA 4911 /DEL/2016 AY:20 08 - 09 BIRLA TRANSASIA CARPETS VS. D CIT, CIRCLE 3(1) , NEW DELHI . 3 DRAFT DICTATED ON 14/05/ 2019 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 14/05/ 2019 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 1 4 / 0 5 / 1 9 ORDER UPLOADED ON FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO A.R. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER