Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH (A
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM]
order
: September 06, 2018 ORDER
Per P.M. Jagtap, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – Burdwan dated 30.03.2017.
At the time of hearing fixed in this case today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. Even the notice of the said hearing sent to the assessee at the address given in the appeal memo has come back undelivered from the postal authority with the remark “not known”. It appears that the assessee has not even bothered to furnish a correct and complete address in order to enable the registry to serve the notice of hearing. This casual approach of the assessee shows that he is not seriously interested in prosecuting this appeal filed before the Tribunal.
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Naba Kumar Dutta 3. 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 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.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 6th September, 2018.