Bandana Agarwal, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-31(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1865/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9292 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1865/KOL./2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-2013 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1865/KOL/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-2013 BANDANA AGARWAL,................................... ..................................APPELLANT C/O. BHARAT VED EXIM, 53, MOTT LANE, KOLKATA-700 013 [PAN: AEAPB 6511 M ] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ .....................................RESPONDENT WARD-31(1), KOLKATA, 10B, MIDDLETON ROW, 4 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 071 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI BANI BRATA DUTTA, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : MARCH 08, 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MARCH 08, 2017 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-9, KOLKATA DAT ED 18.05.2016. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W AS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 20.01.2017. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE AND THE HEA RING, THEREFORE, WAS ADJOURNED TO 08.03.2017 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE REG ISTRY TO SEND THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE A DDRESS GIVEN IN THE APPEAL MEMO BY REGISTERED POST WITH A/D. ON 08.03.2 017, I.E. TODAY, NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SHE IS NOT SERIOUSLY I NTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. I.T.A. NO. 1865/KOL./2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-2013 PAGE 2 OF 2 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 MARCH 08, 201 7. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 8 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017 COPIES TO : (1) SMT. BANDANA AGARWAL, C/O. BHARAT VED EXIM, 53, MOTT LANE, KOLKATA-700 013 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-31(1), KOLKATA, 10B, MIDDLETON ROW, 4 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 071 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-9, KOLKAT A; (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.