Smt. Sunita Rani, Chandigarh V. ACIT, Chandigarh

ITA 649/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90176 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 644/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02) AND ITA NOS. 645 TO 649/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2003-04 TO 2007-08) SMT.SUNITA RANI VS. THE A.C.I.T., # 1273, SECTOR 44-C, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: ABKPR1787L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 26.05.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.05.2015 O R D E R PER BENCH : ALL THE ABOVE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), (CENTRAL), GURGAON DATED 29.3.2012 F OR THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 2. THE RECORD REVEALED THAT THESE APPEALS WERE TAKE N UP FOR HEARING MANY TIMES AND WERE ALSO ADJOURNED ON THE R EQUEST OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO NOTIFIED OF THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED FOR 26.5.2015 THROUGH 2 REGISTERED POST. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE. IT, THERE FORE, APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUT ING THE APPEALS. THEREFORE, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AR E LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. THE LAWS AID THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THE PRINCIPLE IS EMBO DIED AS WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBU S JURA SUBVENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPIN G 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 HOLKAR V CW AT 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 NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS CIT (2008) 296 ITR 4 95 RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FR OM THE ASSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V B.N. BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER 118 ITR 461 A T PAGE 3 477-78 HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FIL ING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN T HE CASES CITED (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ALL APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 26 TH DAY OF MAY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 26 TH MAY, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH