Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: VAT Audit :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: empanelment :: VAT RATES :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: form 3cd :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: due date for vat payment :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: TDS :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT
From the Courts »
 Virag Tiwari Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-21 & Others
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT (Supreme Court)
 Order of a Four-Member Appellate Authority constituted under Chartered Accountants Act is Valid: Delhi HC
 Emami Infrastructure Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Bar Council of India vs. A. K. Balaji & Ors (Supreme Court)
 ITO vs. Venkatesh Premises Co-op Society Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)

Vijay Laxmi Arora, A-3/173, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(4), New Delhi
September, 15th 2015
               DELHI BENCH `SMC', NEW DELHI
                          ITA No. 6857/Del/2014
                           Asstt. Year : 2005-06
Vijay Laxmi Arora,                Vs Income Tax Officer,
A-3/173, Paschim Vihar,              Ward 25(4),
New Delhi.                           New Delhi


     (APPELLANT)                        (RESPONDENT)

                 Assessee by : None
                 Revenue by : Shri Sarbhjit Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing : 14.09.2015   Date of Pronouncement : 14 .09.2015


     This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated
15.09.2014 of ld. CIT(A)-XXIV, New Delhi.

2.   During the course of hearing, nobody was present on
behalf of the assessee. Earlier also, when the case was fixed
for hearing on 14.8.2015, nobody was present and it was
directed that the notice of hearing be sent to the assessee
through registered post, which was issued on 18.8.2015 at the
address mentioned by the assessee in Form No.36/impugned
                                       2                     ITA No.6857/Del/2014
                                                                 Vijay Laxmi Arora

order of the CIT(A) as well as in the assessment order.
However,         neither      the    assessee    nor        her    authorized
representative was present and even no adjournment was
sought.      It, 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
                                        3                    ITA No.6857/Del/2014
                                                                 Vijay Laxmi Arora

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
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. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 14/09/2015) Sd/- (N. K. Saini) Accountant Member Dated: 14/09/2015 dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Our Experience

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions