Sh. Mahabir Singh, Ludhiana V. ITO, Ludhiana

ITA 961/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57620 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-01-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDGARH BENCH A BEFORE SHRI H.L. KARWA AND SHRI D.K. SRIVASTAVA ITA NO. 961/CHD/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 SH. MAHABIR SINGH VS ITO, WARD V(2), 13718, ST. NO. 5, LUDHIANA. PARBHAT NAGAR, LUDHIANA. PAN: AIPPS69018P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. N.K. SAINI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 16.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.01.2012 ORDER PER H.L. KARWA: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 18.05.20 10 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ABOVE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 16.01.2012. NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE DESPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE BY RPAD. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF HEARING. THUS, IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE THE MATTER. THE LAWS AID THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS . CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVI SIONS 2 OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WE RE CONSIDERED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V S MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADM ITTED FOR NON PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.01.2012. SD/- SD/- (D.K. SRIVASTAVA) (H.L. KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 16.01.2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR