Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Agra V. ACIT, Agra

ITA 655/AGR/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6981 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 27-10-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

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.655 & 656/AGR/2008 ASST. YEARS: 2006-07 & 2007-08 BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. (BSNL), VS. A.C.I.T. (TD S), AGRA. SHAHZADI MANDI, AGRA. (PAN : AGRB 10047 C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD KUMAR, JR. D.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. : THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINS T TWO SEPARATE ORDERS, BOTH DATED 07.08.2008, PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-I, AGRA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 & 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. THE GROUNDS RAISE D IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE AS UNDER :- GROUNDS IN ITA NO.655/AGR/2008:- 1. BECAUSE SUSTAINING OF CHARGE OF INTEREST AMOUNT ING TO ` 61,003/- U/S 201(1A) OF THE I.T. ACT BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT, NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND IS, THERE FORE, LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 2 GROUNDS IN ITA NO.656/AGR/2008:- 1. BECAUSE SUSTAINING OF CHARGE OF INTEREST AMOUNT ING TO ` 41,372/- U/S 201(1A) OF THE I.T. ACT BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), AGRA, IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT, NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND IS, T HEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 2. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED AND THE GROUNDS RAISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE COMMON EXCEPT FOR AMOUNTS IN DISPUTE, THEREFORE, BO TH THE APPEALS ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIE NCE. 3. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASS ESSEE IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36. INSPITE OF THE SAME, NEITHER THE ASSES SEE NOR THEIR AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS ALSO BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. T HE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS IN THE YEAR 2008 AND THE SAME BEING VERY OL D MATTER, WE CANNOT KEEP IT PENDING. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE. THE LAW ASSISTS ONLY THOSE WHO ARE VIG ILANT OF THEIR RIGHTS, AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEM. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. U NDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RU LE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX 3 APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AS WELL AS THE DECI SIONS 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-ADMIT TED, AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.06.2011 ). SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 27 TH JUNE, 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 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY