M/s Commercial Sales, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-42(4), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 479/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4884 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 479/KOL./2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 479 /KOL/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 M/S. COMMERCIAL SALES,............................. ........................APPELLANT 155/3, ASHOKGARH PWD ROAD, KOLKATA-700 035 [PAN : AADFC 8222 M] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ............................RESPONDENT WARD-42(4), KOLKATA, 3, GOVERNMENT PLACE, KOLKATA-700 001 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI RAJAT KUMAR KUREEL, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : MAY 04, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MAY 04, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-13, KOLKATA DA TED 30.12.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS INI TIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22.04.2016. THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF THE SAID DATE. ALTHOUGH NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON 22.04.2016, THE HEARING FIXED ON THE SAID DATE WAS ADJOURNED BY THE BENCH TO 04.05.2016 BY GRANTING TH E APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJOURNMENT. ON 04.05.2016, I.E. TODAY , NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICAT ION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CO NDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PR OSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. I.T.A. NO. 479/KOL./2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 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 MAY 04, 2016. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 4 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. COMMERCIAL SALES, 155/3, ASHOKGARH PWD ROAD, KOLKATA-700 035 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-42(4), KOLKATA, 3, GOVERNMENT PLACE, KOLKATA-700 001 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-13, KOLKA TA; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , KOLKATA; (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.