Sh. Imranjit Singh, Ludhiana V. Pr. CIT-3, Ludhiana

MA 145/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6539 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRAKANTA SR DR

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH , !' # $ % &' , '( BEFORE: SH. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 145/CHD/2018 IN ./ ITA NO.1504/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI IMRANJIT SINGH, PROP. M/S IRIS INTERNATIONAL, 198-R, MODEL TOWN, LUDHIANA. THE PR. CIT - 3 , LUDHIANA. ./ PAN NO: AZVPS0911L / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : NONE # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA, SR.DR $ % ! &/ DATE OF HEARING : 22.02.2019 '()* ! &/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.02.2019 ')/ ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1504/CHD/2017 HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE PLE ADING THEREIN FOR RECALLING THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2018 OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL WHICH WAS DISMISSED EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. HOWEVER , NONE HAS COME PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT NOR ANY ADJ OURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED. EVEN ON THE LAST DAT E OF HEARING, NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . M.A.145/CHD/2018 IN ITA -1504/CHD/2017 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED I N PERUSING HIS MISC. APPLICATION. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE I S EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE F ACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME- TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 3. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADH YA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAOHOLKAR VS. CWT (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, HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 IT R 495 RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSE E REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FR OM THE ASSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE& ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 A T PAGE 477-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE F ILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAM E. M.A.145/CHD/2018 IN ITA -1504/CHD/2017 PAGE 3 OF 3 6. SO, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATI ON FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION MOVED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.02.2019. SD/- SD/- ( # $ % &' ) ( ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG ) '( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / / CIT 4. $ / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , & 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7% / GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, 8 # / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR