M/S. MA Chandi Durga Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Raniganj V. ACIT, CC-XXX, KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 196/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4511 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 196/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-2010 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 196 /KOL/ 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-2010 M/S. MA CHANDI DURGA ISPAT PVT. LIMITED,........... .......................APPELLANT 61/1A, N.S. ROAD, RANIGANJ, BURDWAN-713 347 [PAN : AACCM 7892 H] -VS.- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,.............. ........................RESPONDENT CENTRAL CIRCLE-XXX, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA, 110, SHANTI PALLY, KOLKATA-700 107 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SAURABH KUMAR, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JULY 11, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JULY 11, 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)-21, KOLKATA DA TED 19.12.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED IN THIS CASE TODAY, I.E. 11.07.2016, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPL ICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. EVEN THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST HAS BEEN RETURNED B ACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES UNDELIVERED WITH A REMARK INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS. THE ASSESSEE THUS HAS NOT EVEN FURNISHED ITS FULL ADDRE SS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING. IT APPEARS FROM T HIS CASUAL AND NEGLIGENT I.T.A. NO. 196/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-2010 PAGE 2 OF 2 APPROACH OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT IS NOT SERIOUSLY I NTERESTED 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 JULY 11, 2016 . SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 11 TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. MA CHANDI DURGA ISPAT PVT. LIMITED, 61/1A, N.S. ROAD, RANIGANJ, BURDWAN-713 347 (2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-XXX, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA, 110, SHANTI PALLY, KOLKATA-700 107 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-21, 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.