RAVI KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 4(2), JAIPUR

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 18-01-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2020-21 raising grounds of appeal at Form No. 36. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee and the narration as mentioned therein are as under:-

2 RAVI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 5. In Ground no. 1 to 5 appellant has challenged the addition amounting to Rs. 12,59,803/- on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 57 of the I.T. Act. The assessee has not submitted any explanation regarding the source of these credits in bank a/c. which are the main issue in this case. Other grounds of appeal are general in nature. Several opportunities have been allowed to the appellant in terms of the notices fixed for hearing of the appeal under section 250 of the Act issued to the appellant. No compliance has been made by the appellant till date. The details of the opportunities allowed to the appellant to represent in this case are tabulated as under:- DIN No. Date of Notice Date of hearing Remarks fixed 1056789572 05-10-2023 20-10-2023 No reply 1057954977 15-11-2023 30-11-2023 No reply 1058955930 21-12-2023 01-01-2024 No reply

6. The aforesaid non compliances reveals beyond doubt that the appellant has nothing to say in the matter-of-present appeal. Thus, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed on this ground itself. The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum " TBUS,NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. Considering the facts and relying on the decision of the Hon'ble, ITAT, Delhi Bench, in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38-ITD- 320 and the judgement of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223-ITR-480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.

7. The appellant has raised grounds of appeal No. 1 to 5 which challenged the addition of amount of Rs. 12,59,803/- on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 57 of the I.T. Act. AO has noticed that assessee has not filed its return of income. He was given numerous opportunities during assessment proceedings. Appellant has raised dispute on addition in grounds of appeal but he has not provided any cogent explanation in support of his contention. It is to be noted that because, non prosecution on the part of appellant, appeal is already decided by me in para '6' of this order. In view of the above Grounds of Appeal No. 1 to 5 are hereby dismissed.