IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH A SMC BEFORE SHRI JASON P BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T . A. NO S . 2731 & 2732 /BANG/20 1 8 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 15 - 16 ) M/S. PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMIT, POST LINGANUR, TALUK JAMAKHANDI, DISTRICT BAGALKOT - 587 301 . APPELLANT. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 2, BAGALKOT. .. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : NONE. R E SPONDENT BY : S HRI K.R. NARAYANA , J CIT (D.R) DATE OF H EARING : 7.11 . 2018. DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 7.11. 2018. O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, A .M . : TH ESE APPEAL S BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S DT. 25.06.2018 OF COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , B ELAGAVI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 15 - 16 . 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THESE APPEALS WERE CA LLED FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. 7.11.2018. HENCE , I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 2 IT A NO S . 2731 & 2732 /BANG/201 8 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL S ON H AND. THE LAW AIDS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT, NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP UPON THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN WELL KNOWN DICTUM, VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS SERV IUNT LEGES . CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW T HE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. (38 ITD 320) (DEL), THE APPEAL S ARE DISMISSED. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2015 - 16 ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7THNOV., 2018 . SD/ - ( JASON P BOAZ ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DT. 7.11.2018 . *REDDY GP COPY TO : 1. APPELLA NT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE.