M/S. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 645/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 June 2019AY 2014-153 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 held that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal and that the law aids the vigilant. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notices sent to the assessee were returned unserved.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of interest in pursuing it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC-A’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI JASON P BOAZ

O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz, A.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dt.19.02.2019 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Belgavi for the Assessment Year 2001-02.

2.

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing today i.e., 10.06.2019. It is seen from the record that the assessee has earlier been afforded hearings on 03.05.2019, where none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is also seen that the notices issued by Registry fixing the dates of hearing of this appeal for 13.05.2019 and 10.06.2019 have been returned unserved by Postal authorities. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case as laid out above, I am satisfied that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal.

3.

In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not seriously interested in pursuing the appeal on hand. 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 SERVIUNT LEGES”. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2001-02 is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →