Poonam Agarwaol, Kolkata V. DCIT, Circle-23, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 109/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4069 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-01-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 109/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 109/KOL/ 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 POONAM AGARWAL,.................................... ....................................APPELLANT 9, HUNGER FORD STREET, KOLKATA-700 017 [PAN: AGRPA 8145 P] -VS.- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,................. ...................RESPONDENT CIRCLE-23, KOLKATA, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, BAMBOO VILLA, KOLKATA-700 014 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE MD. GYASUDDIN, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : DECEMBER 19, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : DECEMBER 19, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XIV, KOLKATA D ATED 31.03.2014. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W AS EARLIER FIXED FOR HEARING ON 28.10.2016. NONE, HOWEVER, APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE. THE HEARING, THEREFORE, WAS ADJOURNED TO 19.12.2016 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE REGISTRY TO SEND THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH DEPARTMENT. ON 19.1 2.2016, I.E. TODAY, NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED INSP TIE OF THE FACT THAT THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THR OUGH DEPARTMENT HAS I.T.A. NO. 109/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 2 OF 2 BEEN DULY SERVED, A PROOF OF WHICH IS PLACED ON REC ORD. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESESE THAT SHE IS NOT SERIOU SLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT T HOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WEL L KNOWN DICTUM - VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMIENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIENT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WAS CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS.- MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADE SH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.- C.W.T . REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, I TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON DECEMBER 19, 2016. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 19 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) SMT. POONAM AGARWAL, 9, HUNGER FORD STREET, KOLKATA-700 017 (2) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-23, KOLKATA, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, BAMBOO VILLA, KOLKATA-700 014 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XIV, KOLKA TA; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.