Dr. Shakti Bhan Khanna, New Delhi V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Kashmir

ITA 611/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 61120914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2013
• 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. 611 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 PAN: ADCPK8028E DR. SHAKTI BHAN KHANNA VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONE R SONAWAR SRINAGAR, KASHMIR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3, A/P 304 SFS HOUZ KHAS, SRINAGAR, KASHMIR NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. MAHAVIR SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 21.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21.01.2014 ORDER PER BENCH 1. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.08.2013 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JAMMU, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR TODAY I.E. 21.01.2014 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM NO. 3 6, COLUMN 8. IN SPITE OF THE SAME, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUT HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. THUS, IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PUR SUE THE 2 I.T.A. NO. 611 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 MATTER. THE LAWS AID THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT T HOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THE PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED AS WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 3. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY HON'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA R V CWAT 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 PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NO T BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS CIT (2008) 296 I TR 495 RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE A SSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V B.N. BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER 118 ITR 46 1 AT 3 I.T.A. NO. 611 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 PAGE 477-78 HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MER E FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAM E. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN T HE CASES CITED (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITH THE LIBERTY TO TH E ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY FILE APPLICATION FOR RECALLIN G OF THIS ORDER UNDER THE LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST JANUARY, 2014 SD/./- SD/./- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST JANUARY, 2014 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: DR. SHAKTI BHAN KHANNA SONAWAR SRINA GAR, KASHMIR A/P 304 SFS HOUZ KHAS, NEW DELHI 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, SRI NAGAR, KASHMIR 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT, 5. THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER 4 I.T.A. NO. 611 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.