Goldenleap Agency Private Ltd., Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-13(2), Kolkata, Kolkajta

ITA 1260/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1361 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D A J SAWKMIE
• Section: 144; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH A, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. P.M.JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1260/KOL/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. D.A.J.SAWKMIE, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING 05.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07.09.2018 ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2016 PASSED BY CIT(A)-5, KOLKATA FOR AY 2012-013 WHEREIN HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO EX-PARTE. 2. THE REGISTRY FIXED THE DATE OF HEARING OF APPEAL ON 05.09.2018 AND INTIMATED THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE BY ITS LETTER DATED 30.07.2018 BY RPAD. TODAY I.E. 05.09.2018, NEITHER ANY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. FURTHER, IT IS NOTED FROM THE RECORD THAT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE, THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMIENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIENT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE GOLDENLEAP AGENCY PVT.LTD., 34/35/2/1 SHREE ARBINDA ROAD, SALKIA, HOWRAH-711106. PAN-AAECG9597F VS ITO, WARD-13(2), 110, SHANTI PALLI, OPPOSITE RUBY HOSPITAL, KASBA, E.M. BY-PASS, KOLKATA-700107. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.1260/KOL/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) PAGE | 2 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 PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HALKAR VS C.W.T. REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.09.2018. SD/- SD/- (P.M.JAGTAP) (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE:-07.09.2018 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT- GOLDENLEAP AGENCY PVT.LTD., 34/35/2/1 SHREE ARBINDA ROAD, SALKIA, HOWRAH-711106. 2. RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-13(2), 110, SHANTI PALLI, OPPOSITE RUBY HOSPITAL, KASBA, E.M. BY-PASS, KOLKATA-700107. 3. CIT-KOLKATA 4. CIT(APPEALS)-KOLKATA 5. DR: ITAT -KOLKATA BENCHES SR.P.S./H.O.O ITAT, KOLKATA