GST Course
CA Final Online Classes
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Law does not assist a person who is inactive or disputed to remain dormant without asserting them in a court of law.

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Visakhapatnam

Brief :
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29/11/2019 impugned herein passed by the ld.CIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam u/sec. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") for the A.Y. 2010-11.

Citation :
I.T.A. No. 23/VIZ/2020

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER &
SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 23/VIZ/2020
(Asst. Year : 2010-11)

Nusumu Venkata Rambabu,
D.No. 39-1-26, Rangayya Naidu
Street, Kakinada.
(Appellant) 

 vs. 

ACIT, Circle-1,
Kakinada.
PAN No. ADFPN 6657 A
(Respondent)

Assessee by : None.
Department by : Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Sr.DR

Date of hearing : 10/02/2021.
Date of pronouncement : 12/02/2021.

O R D E R

PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29/11/2019 impugned herein passed by the ld.CIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam u/sec. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") for the A.Y. 2010-11.

2. From the impugned order it reflects that though the Ld. CIT(A) afforded various opportunities of hearing to the Assessee, however theAssessee neither attended the appellate proceedings nor filed any adjournment application and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) while observingthat none appeared for the appellate hearing and the case is finalized based on the information available on rerecord. Consequently the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee, against which the Assessee preferred this appeal.
 
3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the order impugned herein. The Appellant did not bother itself to appear and coordinate with appellate proceedings and failed to prosecute its appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and before us as well even after availing variousopportunities and in spite of receiving the notices of hearing of thisappeal, as ordered by Bench through Postal Department and Revenue Department.

Although the instant appeal of the Assessee is liable to be dismissed in order to give effect to the principle that law does not assist the person who is inactive and sleeps over his rights by allowing themwhen challenged or disputed to remain dormant, without asserting them in a court of law. The, principle which forms the basis of this rule is expressed in the maxim vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subveniunt (Law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights), but even a vigilant litigant is prone to commit mistakes. As theaphorism to err is human and is more a practical notion of human behavior than an abstract philosophy, the unintentional lapse on the part of a litigant should not normally cause the doors of the judicaturepermanently closed before him. The effort of the court should not beone of finding means to pull down the shutters of adjudicatory jurisdiction before a party who seeks justice, on account of any mistake committed by him, but to see whether it is possible to entertain hisgrievance if it is genuine, therefore, considering the facts that the Ld.CIT(A) did not pass the order under challenge on merit and as aspeaking order, we consider it appropriate and proper to remand back the instant case to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for passing speaking orderon merits, while affording proper and reasonable opportunity of beingheard to the Assessee/Appellant, in order to follow the principle ofnatural justice. We also consider it appropriate to direct the Assessee/Appellantto extend its full co-operation and participation in the appellateproceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when would be required andin case of further default, the Assessee shall not be subjected to any leniency.

4. In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

 Order Pronounced in open Court on this 12 th day of Feb., 2021.

Sd/-                                                        sd/-
 (D.S. SUNDER SINGH)                      (N.K. CHOUDHRY)
Accountant Member                          Judicial Member


Dated: 12
th February, 2021.
vr/-

Copy to:
1. The Assessee - Nusumu Venkata Rambabu, D.No. 39-1-26,
Rangayya Naidu Street, Kakinada.
2. The Revenue – ACIT, Circle-1, Kakinada.
3. The Pr.CIT-2, Visakhapatnam.
4. The CIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam.
5. The D .R., Visakhapatnam.
6. Guard file.
 
By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU)
Sr. Private Secretary,
ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

 

 

Guest
on 01 March 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 19
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags