IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.164/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2012-13 M/S. PARTHAM MINERALS, H.NO. 666, SECTOR 38, GURGAON. PAN: AAIFP 6992L VS. ITO-WARD-3(2), GURGAON. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MS. BEDOBANI CHAUDHURI, SR.D.R. ASSESSEE(S) BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 17/04/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/04/2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-I, GURGAON DATED 08.09.2016. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN NO APPLI CATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. THE LAWS AID THOSE WHO ARE V IGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM 'VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUN. 3. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN MY CONSIDERED OPIN ION ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. AS SUCH I HOL D THAT THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD , I 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.) ITA NO.164/DEL/2017 2 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 CAS ES CITED (SUPRA), I DISMISS THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON P ROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY 17 TH APRIL, 2017 SD/- (B.P. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17/04/2017 PRABHAT KUMAR KESARWANI, SR.P.S. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(APPEALS) 5.DR: ITAT ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI