Binod Kumar Agarwal, Paschim Medinipur V. ITO, WD-2(1), PASCHIM MIDNAPUR, Midnapore

ITA 293/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1754 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 293/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 293/KOL/ 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 BINOD KUMAR AGARWAL,............................... ...............................APPELLANT BALARAMDIHI, P.O. JHARGRAM, PASCHIM MIDNAPUR-721 507 [PAN: ADDPA 3576 F] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ...................................RESPONDENT WARD-2(1), MIDNAPUR, SAHOO BHAWAN, MIDNAPUR-721 101, APPEARANCES BY: N O N E , FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI P.K. MANDAL, ADDL. CIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTME NT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 07, 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUGUST 07, 2017 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. .: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11, KOLKATA DA TED 16.01.2015, WHEREBY HE CONFIRMED THE PENALTY OF RS.1,06,227/- I MPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C). 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W AS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 29.06.2017. NONE, HO WEVER, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE AND THE HEA RING, THEREFORE, WAS ADJOURNED TO 07.08.2017 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE REG ISTRY TO SEND THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGIS TERED POST WITH A/D AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE APPEAL MEMO. ON 07.08.2017 , I.E. TODAY, NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. IT APPEARS FROM THIS NON-COMPLIANT ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE IS NOT SERIOUSLY I NTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. I.T.A. NO. 293/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 PAGE 2 OF 2 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 07, 20 17. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 7 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 COPIES TO : (1) SHRI BINOD KUMAR AGARWAL, BALARAMDIHI, P.O. JHARGRAM, PASCHIM MIDNAPUR-721 507 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), MIDNAPUR, SAHOO BHAWAN, MIDNAPUR-721 101, (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11, KOLK ATA; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,KOLKAT A (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/DDO INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.