Gopeshwar Hotel & Estate Ltd., New Delhi vs Assessee
- CitationI.T.A NO. 1690 &1689 /Del/2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal reasoned that an appeal may be dismissed for non-prosecution where the appellant, having been duly served with notice of hearing, fails to appear and no adjournment is sought, so that the appeal is effectively not pursued; the appellant's failure to pursue the appeal is itself the ground of dismissal, and the Tribunal is not bound to decide an appeal that the appellant has abandoned by inaction.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. T. Vasdnthan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 13/4/2015 Order pronounced on: 13/04/2015
ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM
These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 27/01/2012 of CIT (A) IV, New Delhi. During the course of hearing, nobody was present on behalf of the assesses neither any adjournment was sought, the notice of hearing was sent to the assessee on 26/02/2015 which has 2 ITA NOS.1690&1689/DEL/2012
not been returned by the postal authority. So, it is presumed that the notice of hearing was served upon the assessee.
2. The law aids those who are vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum, "VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS 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 Hon'ble 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, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee.
5. Their Lordships of Hon'ble 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 appeals for non-prosecution.
7. These two appeals are dismissed.
3 ITA NOS.1690&1689/DEL/2012
The order is pronounced in the open court on 13 April 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (G.C.GUPTA) (N. K. SAINI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13 /04/2015
*R. Naheed*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
Sl. NO. Description Date 1. Date of Dictation by the Author 13.04.2015 2. Draft placed before the Dictating Member 15/5/15
3. Draft placed before the Second Member
4. Draft approved by the Second Member
5. Date of approved order comes to the Sr. PS
6. Date of pronouncement of order
7. Date of file sent to the Bench Clerk
8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk
9. Date of dispatch of order 4 ITA NOS.1690&1689/DEL/2012
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free