Smt. Anuradha Aslam, rop. M/s Rohit Teppich Exports, Bhadohi V. DCIT, Varanasi

ITA 115/ALLD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4230 (ITAT-VARANASI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-1969
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 115/Alld/2012 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Anuradha Aslam The Dy. CIT, Range-I, Prop. M/s. Rohit Teppich Exports, Vs. Varanasi Plot No. 695, By Pass Road, Dist: Bhadohi PAN: ACWPA 8139N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri A.K. Singh, DR. Date of hearing: 03.08.2015 ORDER PER: P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Varanasi dated 17.03.2012. 2. The appeal was fixed for hearing before the Bench on 3.08.2015. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by Registered AD, but there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. Even no application seeking adjournment was filed. The laws aid those who are vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum 2 "VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUN”. 3. Under these circumstances, in my considered opinion assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. As such I hold that this appeal is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard, we place reliance upon following case laws: 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another 118 ITR 461(SC). 4. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), I dismiss this appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on /08/2015. Sd/- ( P.K. BANSAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10/08/2015 Prabhat Kumar Kesarwani, Sr.P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 3 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR