NIRBHAY TREHAN, JAMMU V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

ITA 558/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1322 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2019
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.558 & 559(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 NIRBHAY TREHAN, 31 D/C, GANDHI NAGAR, JAMMU. [PAN:AAKPT-9193K] VS. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. CHARAN DASS (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING : 12.06.2019 DATE OF PRON OUNCEMENT: 12.06.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS DATED 04/01/2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)- 5, LUDHIANA U/S. 250 (6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT) FOR ASST. YEAR:2012-1 3 WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) AFFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND PENALT Y ORDER MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. FROM THE ORDER IT REFLECTS THAT THOUGH THE LD. CIT( A) FIXED THE CASES FOR HEARING ON 5-10-2016, 17/11/2016 30-11-2 016 AND 07-12-2016, HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ATTENDED T HE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLI CATION AND IN THAT EVENTUALITY IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ITA NOS.558 & 559/ASR/201 (A.Y.2012-13) NIRBHAY TREHAN VS. DY. CIT 2 APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEALS, THE REFORE, HE WAS PLEASED TO DISMISS THE APPEALS. 3. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDER IMPUGNED HEREIN. THE APPELLANT DID NOT BOTHER HIMSEL F TO APPEAR AND CO-ORDINATE WITH APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS EVEN AFTER AFFORDING THE SAID OPPORTUNITIES. ALTHOUGH THE INSTANT APPEALS O F THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN ORDER TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLE THAT LAW DOES NOT ASSIST THE PERSON WHO IS INACTI VE AND SLEEPS OVER HIS RIGHTS BY ALLOWING THEM WHEN CHALLENGED OR DISPUTED TO REMAIN DORMANT, WITHOUT ASSERTING THEM IN A COURT OF LAW. THE, PRINCIPLE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THIS RULE I S EXPRESSED IN THE MAXIM VIGILANTIBUS , NON DORMIENTIBUS , JURA SUBVENIUNT (LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS), BUT EVEN A VIGILANT LIT IGANT IS PRONE TO COMMIT MISTAKES. AS THE APHORISM TO ERR IS HUMAN AND I S MORE A PRACTICAL NOTION OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THAN AN AB STRACT PHILOSOPHY, THE UNINTENTIONAL LAPSE ON THE PART OF A LITIGANT SHOULD NOT NORMALLY CAUSE THE DOORS OF THE JUDICATURE PERMANENTLY CLOSED BEFORE HIM. THE EFFORT OF THE COUR T SHOULD NOT BE ONE OF FINDING MEANS TO PULL DOWN THE SHUTTERS OF ADJUDICATORY JURISDICTION BEFORE A PARTY WHO SEEKS JUSTIC E, ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MISTAKE COMMITTED BY HIM, BUT TO SEE WHET HER IT IS POSSIBLE TO ENTERTAIN HIS GRIEVANCE IF IT IS GENUINE. THOUGH, THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO TOUCHED UPON THE MERIT OF THE CASE, HOW EVER CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT NOTICE OF HEARING RETURNED WITH REMARKS OF POSTAL AUTHORITY 'REFUSED' AND NOTICE THROUGH AS SESSING OFFICER COULD NOT BE SERVED DESPITE MAKING EFFORTS, WE FEEL ITA NOS.558 & 559/ASR/201 (A.Y.2012-13) NIRBHAY TREHAN VS. DY. CIT 3 IT APPROPRIATE AND PROPER TO REMAND BACK THE INSTANT CASE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH ON MERITS , SU FFICE TO SAY WHILE AFFORDING PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT, IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THE PRINC IPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. WE ALSO FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT TO EXTEND ITS FULL CO-OPERATION AND PARTICIPATION IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS AND WHEN REQUIRED AND IN CASE OF FURTHER DEFAULT, T HE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE SUBJECTED TO ANY LENIENCY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.06.2019. SD/- SD/- ( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED:12.06.2019 /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) SHAFIQ AHMAD QASBA, RESIDENCY SRINAGAR, KASHMIR (2) THE ITO, WARD-(3), SRINAGAR (3) THE CIT(A), J&K, JAMMU (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER