IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.87/AGR/2008 KUNDAN NIWAS DHARAMSHALA, VS. THE COMMISSIONER O F INCOME-TAX, C/O. SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL, GWALIOR. SECRETARY, JAT MOHALLA, GUNA (M.P.). (PAN : AABTK 2945 F). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K. MISHRA, SR. D.R. ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, A.M.: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT DATED 30.11.2007 BY WHICH THE CIT REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE AS SESSEE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA (B)(II) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER). 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR H EARING ON 21.04.2010, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SENT BY REGISTERED POST. FROM THIS IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOU S TO PURSUE ITS CASE. THE LAW ASSISTS ONLY THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT OF THEIR RIGHTS, AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEM. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTI BUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVIS IONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX 2 APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AS WELL AS THE DECI SIONS BY THE TRIBUNAL AS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED, 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND BY THE HIGHER COURTS, AS IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), WE TREAT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AS UN- ADMITTED, AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.04.2010) . SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (P.K. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 21 ST APRIL, 2010. PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY