Bangalaxmi Khadi Bhawan, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-52(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2251/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4691 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-12-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 2251/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2251 /KOL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 BANGALAXMI KHADI BHAWAN,........................... ......................APPELLANT 98, DR. K.S. ROAD, JADAVPUR, KOLKATA-700 032 [PAN : AAFFB 0969 C] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ..............................RESPONDENT WARD-52(1), KOLKATA, 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH), KOLKATA-700 068 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI PRABAL CHOWDHURY, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 11, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUGUST 11, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXIII. KO LKATA DATED 15.02.2008. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W AS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 13.06.2016. NONE, HOWEVER, APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE. THE HEARING WAS, THEREFO RE, ADJOURNED TO 11.08.2016 WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE REGISTRY TO SE ND THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST WIT H A/D AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE APPEAL MEMO. ON 11.08.2016, I.E. TODAY , NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICAT ION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT T HERE WAS AN ABNORMAL DELAY OF 2412 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN F ILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE I.T.A. NO. 2251/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 PAGE 2 OF 2 THE TRIBUNAL. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE A SSESSEE THAT IT IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FIL ED 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 AUGUST 11, 20 16. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 11 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) BANGALAXMI KHADI BHAWAN, 98, DR. K.S. ROAD, JADAVPUR, KOLKATA-700 032 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-52(1), KOLKATA, 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH), KOLKATA-700 068 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXIII, KOLKATA; (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.