SMT. HARNEET KAUR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6623/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 July 2019AY 2006-072 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal due to the delay and non-compliance. Citing the principle that law assists the vigilant, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as time-barred.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT significantly beyond the prescribed limitation period. The registry issued a defect notice for non-filing of a condonation petition, which the assessee failed to comply with. The assessee also remained absent on the date of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed beyond the limitation period without a condonation petition and without appearing for hearing should be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. H. S. SidhuDr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT DR
Hearing: 29.07.2019Pronounced: 29.07.2019

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 6623/Del/2016
ITA No. 6624/Del/2016
ITA No. 6625/Del/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 29.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 29.07.2019 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

At the outset, we find from the record that the appeal was filed on 27.12.2016 whereas the order by the ld. CIT (A) u/s 250 of the Act has been passed on 12.06.2015. Thus, the appeal has been prima facie time barred by 490 days. No condonation petition was filed along with the appeal. Having found the defect, a defect notice has been issued by the Registry on 30.01.2017 to the assessee regarding non-filing of the condonation petition. The assessee has not complied to the notice.

2.

Today, on the designated date of hearing none from the assessee has appeared and no application for condonation has been filed. Hence, keeping in view, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. As observed by the Apex Court in many cases, the law assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights as found in the Maxim “Vililantibus Non Dormientibus Jura Subveniunt”. We are conscious of the fact that the period of limitation should not come as a hindrance to do substantial justice between the parties. However, at the same time, a party cannot sleep over its right ignoring the statute of limitation and without giving sufficient and reasonable explanation for the delay. The assessee should be well aware of the statutory provisions and the period of limitation and should pursue its remedies diligently.

3.

Since, the matter has been time barred, the appeal is hereby dismissed with liberty to the assessee to approach the Tribunal with condonation application if so desires.

4.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/07/2019).

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →