J.S. Yadav, Ghaziabad vs Assessee

Date of Hearing : 04.03.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 04.03.2015

ORDER

Per N. K. Saini, AM:

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 08.03.2013 of ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad.

2. Earlier this case was fixed on 27.01.2015 and was adjourned for today i.e. 04.03.2015 since the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the paper book on the said date and the date was announced in the open Court in the presence of both the parties. However, during the course of hearing, neither anybody was present on behalf of the assessee nor the adjournment was sought. It, therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested to prosecute the matter.

3. 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 ITA No. 3818/Del/2013 2

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.

4. 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."

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. So by respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.

8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

(Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/03/2015).

Sd/- Sd/- (A. T. Varkey) (N. K. Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3818/Del/2013 3

Dated: 04/03/2015 A.K. Verma Copy forwarded to:

1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA No. 3818/Del/2013 4

Initial Date

1. Draft dictated on 04.03.2015 PS

2. Draft placed before author 04.03.2015 PS

3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM/AM second member

4. Draft discussed/approved by JM/AM Second Member.

5. Approved Draft comes to the 05.03.2015 PS/PS Sr.PS/PS

6. Kept for pronouncement on PS

7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 05.03.2015 PS

8. Date on which file goes to the AR

9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.