TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by M. M. KUMAR J.— This order shall dispose of I. T. A. Nos. 39 and 40 of 2005 as common questions of law and facts are involved. However, the facts are being referred from I. T. A. No. 39 of 2005. 2. The assessee-appellant has filed the instant appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity "the Act") against the order dated August 20, 2004, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench "B" in I. T. A. No. 695(Chd.) of 2004 in respect of the assessment year 1993-94, claiming that the following substantial questions of law would arise for our determination: "(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the present cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usehold withdrawal at Rs. 40,000. Assailing the order of the assessing authority, the assessee-appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ludhiana. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal vide order dated March 18, 2004/March 30, 2004, and upheld the order of the assessing authority, observing that the case was fixed for 17 times on various dates but neither any written request nor any reply on behalf of the assessee-appellant was filed. Thus, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concluded that the assessee-appellant was not interested in pursuing the appeal. In this regard, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) followed the principle as embodied in the well-known dictum vigilanti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als). Even before us, the assessee has not produced any evidence to show that at any point of time, on the last four dates of hearing, as indicated in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee has ever filed any application for adjournment before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)." 4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through an authorised representative. Despite fixing the case for seventeen hearings, no one had put in appearance nor any justifiable reason for adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
