Smt.H.S.Vimala, Bangalore V. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore

ITA 2090/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5351 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K BIJU

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH C BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2090 /BANG/2016 (ASST. YEAR 2010-11 ) SMT. H.S VIMALA, NO.19, 12 DEEPA COMPLEX, PAPAREDDY PALYA, NAGARABHAVI 2 ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 072. . APPELLANT PAN : ADXPV6134G. VS. THE JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE 3(2), BANGALORE. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.K BIJU, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 15-5-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15-5-2017 O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/9/2016 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) 3, BANGALORE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. ITA NO.2090/B/16 2 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. EVEN TODAY ON 15/5/2017, T HIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING AND NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE FOR HEARING SENT THROUGH REGD. AD AT THE GIV EN ADDRESS THOUGH SERVED, HAS ALSO NOT ELICITED ANY COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS IT IS APPARENT TO US THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTEREST ED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL ON HAND. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON TH EIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILAN TIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS SERVIUNT LEGS. CONSIDERING THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW T HE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RUL ES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA L TD. (38 ITD 320) (DEL), THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.2090/B/16 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MAY, 2017 . SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (JAS ON P BOAZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE DATED : /5/2017 VMS COPY TO :1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER ASST. REG ISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.