Gagan Deep Khaturia, SRIGANGANAGAR v. ITO, SRIGANGANAGAR

ITA 184/JODH/2014 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2014 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 18423314 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN ADYPJ8469P
Bench Jodhpur
Appeal Number ITA 184/JODH/2014
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant Gagan Deep Khaturia, SRIGANGANAGAR
Respondent ITO, SRIGANGANAGAR
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2014
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 31-07-2014
Next Hearing Date 31-07-2014
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 20-03-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 184 / JU/ 20 1 4 [A.Y. 200 9 - 1 0 ] SHRI GAGAN DEEP KHATURIA VS. THE I.T .O PROP. M/S SHIVAM PROPE RTY DEALER WARD - 1 KHICHI CHOWK SRIGANGANAGAR SRIGANGANAGAR PAN NO : ADYPJ 8469 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE B Y : NONE DEPARTMENT B Y : SHRI N.A. JOSHI DATE OF H EARING : 31 .0 7 .201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 3 1 .0 7 . 201 4 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA J .M. TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BIKANER DATED 3 1 . 0 1 .20 1 4 . 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS CASE N OBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMEN T WAS SOUGHT. IT THEREFORE APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER. THE 2 LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIB US JURA SUB VENIUNT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS 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 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 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 M ILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 3 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. SO BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 7 . IN T HE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 31 ST JULY 201 4. SD/ - SD/ - ( N.K.SAINI) [HARI OM MARATHA] ACCOU NTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM B ER DATED : 31 ST JULY 201 4 . VL/ - COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) BY ORDER 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT JODHPUR