SHRI SURJIT SINGH, HOSHIARPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4, HOSHIARPUR

ITA 560/ASR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2148 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMAR PAL ME ENA LD
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.560/ASR/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SH. SURJIT SINGH, S/O SH. LADHA SINGH, C/O SH. A.K. RANDEV CA, 464 L MODEL TOWN, NEAR UBI, JALANDHAR-144003. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (4), HOSHIARPUR. [PAN:EOPPS 5531P] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. AMAR PAL MEEN A (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING: 25.11.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25.11.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-1, JA LANDHAR U/S 250(6) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS T HE ACT), BY WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) ON NON-PROSECUTION DISMISSED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. 2. FROM THE ORDER IT REFLECTS THAT SIX OPPORTUNITIES HA VE BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUING THE NOTICES FROM TIME TO T IME ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT IN FORM NO.35, HOWEVER , ON NONE OF THE DATES, THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ATTENDED THE APPELLATE P ROCEEDINGS ITA N0.560/ASR/ 2019 (A.Y.2010-11) SH. SURJIT SINGH VS. ITO 2 NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION OR WRITTEN SUBM ISSIONS AND IN THAT EVENTUALITY DESPITE GIVING SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIE S OF BEING HEARD, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE APPELLANT IS N OT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. THEREFORE, HE WAS PLEASED TO DISMIS S THE APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE OR DER IMPUGNED HEREIN. THE APPELLANT DID NOT BOTHER HIMSEL F TO APPEAR AND CO-ORDINATE WITH APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS EVEN AFTER AFFO RDING SIX OPPORTUNITIES. ALTHOUGH THE INSTANT APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN ORDER TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLE TH AT LAW DOES NOT ASSIST THE PERSON WHO IS INACTIVE AND SLEEPS OVER HIS RIGH TS BY ALLOWING THEM WHEN CHALLENGED OR DISPUTED TO REMAIN D ORMANT, WITHOUT ASSERTING THEM IN A COURT OF LAW. THE, PRINCIPL E WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THIS RULE IS 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 LITIGANT IS PRONE TO COMMIT MISTAKES. AS THE APHORISM TO ERR IS HUMAN AND IS 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 COURT SHOULD NOT BE ONE OF FIN DING MEANS TO PULL DOWN THE SHUTTERS OF ADJUDICATORY JURISDICTION BEFORE A PARTY WHO SEEKS JUSTICE, ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MISTAKE COMMITTED BY HIM, BUT TO SEE WHETHER IT IS POSSIBLE TO ENTERTAIN HIS GRIEVANCE IF IT IS GENUINE , THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) H AS NOT PASSED THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE ON MERIT, HENCE WE FEEL IT APPR OPRIATE AND PROPER TO REMAND BACK THE INSTANT CASE TO THE FILE OF T HE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH ON MERITS, WHILE AFFORDING PROPER AND RE ASONABLE ITA N0.560/ASR/ 2019 (A.Y.2010-11) SH. SURJIT SINGH VS. ITO 3 OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT, I N ORDER TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. WE ALSO FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO EX TEND ITS FULL CO-OPERATION AND PARTICIPATION IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS AND WHEN REQUIRED AND IN CASE OF FUR THER DEFAULT, THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE SUBJECTED TO ANY LENIENCY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25/1 1/2019. SD/- SD/- (DR. A.L.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER DATED:25/11/2019. /PK/ PS. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THEN CIT(APPEALS) 5. SR DR, I.T.A.T. AMRITSAR 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER