M/s Dhanoolall & Sons, Kolkata V. ACIT, CIR-34, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 569/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9614 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 569/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 569/KOL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 M/S. DHANOOLALL & SONS,............................ ....................................APPELLANT 5, CLIVE ROW, KOLKATA-700 001 [PAN: AACFD 3694 D] -VS.- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,.............. ............................RESPONDENT CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN (POORVA), 7 TH FLOOR, 110, SHANTI PALLI, E.M. BYE PASS, KOLKATA-700 107 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 : JANUARY 02, 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JANUARY 02, 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)-XX, KOLKATA DA TED 03.12.2013. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W AS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30.11.2016. THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, SOUGH T ADJOURNMENT ON THE SAID DATE AND ACCORDINGLY THE HEARING WAS ADJOU RNED TO 02.01.2017. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT THERE WERE NO GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE APPEAL MEMO. THE ASSESSEE ACCORDINGL Y WAS DIRECTED BY THE BENCH TO REMOVE THE SAID DEFECT BY FILING THE G ROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING FIXED ON 02.01.2017. ON 02 .01.2017, I.E. TODAY, NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. EVE N THE DEFECT IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS POINTED OUT EARLIER HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED I.T.A. NO. 569/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 2 OF 2 BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT IS NOT SERIOUSLY IN TERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED 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, WE 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 JANUARY 02, 2 017. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER KOLKATA, THE 2 ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. DHANOOLALL & SONS, 5, CLIVE ROW, KOLKATA-700 001 (2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN (POORVA), 7 TH FLOOR, 110, SHANTI PALLI, E.M. BYE PASS, KOLKATA-700 107 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS-XX, KOLKAT A; (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.