U.P. Pt. DDUP PCV Vishwa Vedhyalaya Evam Gou Anusandhan Sansthan, Mathura V. ITO, Mathura

ITA 544/AGR/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2545 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-07-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.542, 543 & 544/AGR/2008 ASST. YEARS: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 RESPECTIVE LY THE FINANCE OFFICER, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS , U.P. PT. DEEN DAYAL UPPADHYAYA MATHURA. PASHU CHIKITSA VIGYAN VISHWA VAIDHYALAYA EVAM GOU ANUSANDHAN SANSTHAN, MATHURA. (TAN : AGRU 10347 B). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. SHARMA, JR. D.R. ORDER PER BENCH : THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FIELD BY THE ASSESSEE AGAIN ST THE COMMON ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-I, AGRA DATED 02.06.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005 -06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. 2. NOTICES OF HEARING DATED 09.12.2010 WERE ISSUED ON 15.12.2010 FOR THE HEARING ON 04.01.2011 TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ACKNO WLEDGEMENT DUE ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO.36, COLUMN NO.10. INSPITE OF THE SAME, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS ALSO BEEN FIELD BY THE ASSESSEE. KEEPING IN VI EW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATER IN 2 DISPUTE. THE LAW ASSISTS ONLY THOSE WHO ARE VIGILA NT OF THEIR RIGHTS, AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEM. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTA NCES, KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AS WELL AS THE DECISIONS BY THE TRIBUNAL AS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED, 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND BY THE HIGHER COURTS, AS IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), WE TREAT THE ASSESSEES APPEALS AS UN-A DMITTED, AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.01.2011 ). SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 4 TH JANUARY, 2011 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY