M/s. Aaren Exports, Jalandhar V. The Dy. Commissioner of Income tax, Jalandhar

ITA 492/ASR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 49220914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.492(ASR)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2001-02 PAN :AABFA4532A M/S. AAREN EXPORTS, VS. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME-T AX, B-15, FOCAL POINT, JALANDHAR. RANGE-II, JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:NONE RESPONDENT BY:SH.TARSEM LAL, DR DATE OF HEARING:06/11/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:06/11/2012 ORDER PER BENCH ; THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), JALANDHAR, DATED 30.09.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. EARLIER, THE AFORESAID APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARI NG BEFORE THE BENCH ON 02.07.2012. BUT ON THE REQUEST OF SH. J.S. BHASIN, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 06.09.2012. ON 06.09.2012, MR. J.S. BHASIN, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE APPEARED A ND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE TO VERIFY SOME FACTS AND T HE CASE WAS AGAIN ADJOURNED TO 06.11.2012 I.E. FOR TODAY. SH. BHASIN, NOTED THE DATE OF HEARING AND ALSO ENDORSED THE SAME IN THE FILE. TODAY, IN T HE COURSE OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE APPEARED NOR FILED ANY 2 APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. THUS, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THE PR ESENT APPEAL AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED ON THIS GROUND ITSELF. THE L AW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENT IBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCH, IN THE CASE O F C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD; 38-ITD-320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONB LE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (1997) 223-ITR-480, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PR OSECUTION. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE THE APPLICATION, IF SO ADVISED, TO RECALL THE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6TH NOVEMBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 6TH NOVEMBER, 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: AAREN EXPORTS, JALANDHAR. 2. THE DY. CIT, R-III, JALANDHAR. 3. THE CIT(A), JLR. 4. THE CIT, JLR 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR.