Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “A”, KOLKATA
Before: SH. P.M.JAGTAP & SH. S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVIvs
ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 17.10.2016 passed by CIT(A)-5, Kolkata for AY 2012-013 wherein he confirmed the additions made by the AO ex-parte.
The Registry fixed the date of hearing of appeal on 12.07.2018 and intimated the same to the assessee by its letter dated 15.06.2018 by RPAD. On perusal of the record, it is noted that on 12.07.2018 no authorized representative appeared on behalf of the assessee accordingly, the appeal was adjourned to 05.09.2018 i.e. today. When the matter was called, no one was appeared on behalf of the assessee and no application seeking adjournment was filed. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal.
The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the (Assessment Year 2012-13) 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 Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar 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 dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 07.09.2018.