Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
आदेश/Order Per Bench:
The present appeals have been preferred by the assessee for different assessment years against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)]. dated 30.12.2016 and 25.1.2017.
No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. The notice of hearing was sent at the address of the assessee at Zirakpur (Mohali) as well as at the address of the counsel for the assessee per the address ‘Garg Sanjeev & Associates’ who had filed letters on behalf of the assessee. However, notice sent at the address of the assessee has been received back unserved with the remarks of the
ITA Nos. 470 to 473/ Chd/2017- M/s BCL Homes Ltd, Zirakpur, Mohali 2
postal authorities that the office is locked. A perusal of the record also
reveals that notice was earlier sent on 19.3.2018, which remained
‘unserved’ and had been received back. Neither the assessee has given
correct address nor the counsel for the assessee has come in appearance
despite a separate notice issued to him. It appears that the assessee is
no more interested in perusing its appeal. 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 these appeals as
unadmitted.
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.”
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.
Their Lordships of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT
vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another’ (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held
ITA Nos. 470 to 473/ Chd/2017- M/s BCL Homes Ltd, Zirakpur, Mohali 3
that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.
So, by respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss these appeals for non-prosecution.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine.
Order pronounced in the Open Court
Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 09.10.2018 “आर.के.”
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar