Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

ACIT, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. Vs Consolidated Finvest & Holdings Ltd. H.No. 11/5B, Basement-01, New Delhi-110055
June, 22nd 2015
          IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                DELHI BENCH `H', NEW DELHI
     BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM AND SH. N. K. SAINI, AM
     IT(SS)A No. 19/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1989-90 to 1999-2000
S.K.Dixit                        Vs ACIT,
A- 13/1,                            Central Circle-9,
Vasant Vihar                        ARA Centre, E-2,
New Delhi                           Jhandewalan Extension
                                    New Delhi
(APPELLANT)                         (RESPONDENT)
PAN No. AAJPD9197J
           Assessee by : None
           Revenue by : Sh. B.R.R.Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 18.06.2015    Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2015

                               ORDER
Per N. K. Saini, AM:

      This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated
28.03.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-XXXII, New Delhi.

2.    During the course of hearing nobody was present on
behalf of the assessee. However an adjournment application
was submitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee stating
therein that is going out of town for a very urgent family
matter and in those circumstances cannot attend the hearing,
no other reason was given.        We do not see substance in the
said application and the same is rejected, earlier also whenever
the case was fixed for hearing, the adjournment was sought. It,
                                     2                IT(SS)A 19/Del/2013


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 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
                                        3                IT(SS)A 19/Del/2013


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 with the liberty to
recall the order if the assessee requests in accordance with law and Rule
24 of I.T.(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 of the I.T.Rules.

8.       In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
 (Order Pronounced in the Court on              19/06/2015)



      Sd/-                                             Sd/-
   (Diva Singh)                                    (N. K. Saini)
JUDICIAL MEMBER                                ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 19 /06/2015
*Binita*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5.DR: ITAT
                                                 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                              4                    IT(SS)A 19/Del/2013




                                                       Date     Initial
1.    Draft dictated on                            18/06/2015
2.    Draft placed before author                   18/06/2015
3.    Draft proposed & placed before the
      second member
4.    Draft discussed/approved by Second
      Member.
5.    Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS
6.    Kept for pronouncement on
7.    File sent to the Bench Clerk
8.    Date on which file goes to the AR
9.    Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
10.   Date of dispatch of Order.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting