IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (D), KOLKATA [BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM] I.T.A. NO. 1978/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SRI NIRMAL KR. NANDI,..................................APPELLANT (PROP. OF USHA CONSTRUCTION, BELLIA, JAMBEDIA, BANKURA 722 239. [PAN: ADSPN 4713 E] ITO WARD 3(1), BANKURA..........................RESPONDENT KENDUADIHI, BANKURA -722 102. APPEARANCES BY: NONE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI SHANKAR HALDER SR(DR), JCIT, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 07, 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 07, 2019 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), DURGAPUR DATED 22.06.2017 WHEREBY HE CONFIRMED THE PENALTY OF RS. 76,655/- IMPOSED BY THE AO U/S 271B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 07.08.2018. NONE, HOWEVER, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE HEARING WAS A DJOURNED TO 18.09.2018. ON 18.09.2018, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 12.11.2018. ON 12.11.2018, NONE AGAIN APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN ORDER TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.11.2018. ON 29.11.2018, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 31.12.2018. ON 2 SRI NIRMAL KR. NANDI (PROP. USHA CONSTRUCTION) I.T.A. NO.1978/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 31.12.2018, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 07.02.2019. ON 07.02.2019 I.E. TODAY, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. KEEPING IN VIEW THIS NON- COMPLIANT AND NON-COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED 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 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. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (A. T. VARKEY) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 07/02/2019 BISWAJIT, SR. PS 3 SRI NIRMAL KR. NANDI (PROP. USHA CONSTRUCTION) I.T.A. NO.1978/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SRI NIRMAL KR. NANDI, PROP. OF USHA CONSTRUCTION, VILL. BELLIA, P.O. JAMBEDIA, BANKURA 722 239. 2. ITO, WARD 3(1), KENDUADIHI, BANKURA 722 102. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. DR TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / H.O.O. ITAT, KOLKATA