Sh. Atul Jindal, Ludhiana vs Assessee

Shri Atul Jindal, Vs. The A.C.I.T. Prop. Usha Impex, B-XX 2955, Circle VI, Gurdev Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. PAN: ACKPJ4006F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Manjit Singh, DR

Date of hearing : 08.06.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 08.06.2015

PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against

the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals)-II, Ludhiana dated 24.4.2014 for assessment year

2008-09.

2. The order of the learned CIT (Appeals) revealed that

the appeal of the assessee was fixed before him many times

and despite service of notices, the assessee did not make any

compliance. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was

decided ex-parte.

2

3. The assessee was notified of the dates of hearing

through registered post. However, none appeared on behalf

of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal despite

service of notice in ordinary course of business. It, therefore,

appears that the assessee is no more interested in prosecuting

the appeal. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is liable to

be dismissed. The laws aid those who are vigilant, not those

who sleep upon their rights. The principle is embodied as

well known dictum, 'VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS

JURA SUBVENIUNT'. Considering the facts and keeping in

view the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the Appellate Tribunal

Rules as were considered in 38 ITD 320 (Del) in the case of

CIT v Multiplan India Ltd., we treat this appeal as

unadmitted.

4. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble M.P. High Court

in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v CWAT 223 ITR

480 wherein it has been held as under:-

" I f t h e p a r t y , a t wh o s e i n s t a n c e t h e r e f e r e n c e i s made, f ails to appear at the hearing, or f ails in taking steps f or preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the ref erence, the c o u r t i s n o t b o u n d t o a n s we r t h e r e f e r e n c e . "

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.

3

6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

CIT v B.N. Bhattarchargee And Another 118 ITR 461 at page

477-78 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 this appeal filed by the assessee for

non prosecution.

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

dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 8th day of

June, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated : 8 t h June, 2015

*Rati*

Copy to: The Appellant/The Respondent/The CIT(A)/The CIT/The DR.

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Chandigarh