Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi
Date of concluding the hearing : July 05, 2017 Date of pronouncing the order : July 05, 2017 O R D E R Per Shri P.M. Jagtap, A.M..: These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two separate orders passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata- XVIII, Kolkata dated 29.04.2011, whereby he rejected the applications of the assessee for renewal of registration under section 12A and exemption under section 80G.
In this case, the appeals filed by the assessee were initially fixed for hearing before the Tribunal on 19.09.2016. The assessee, however, sought adjournment on the said date. Thereafter the appeals of the assessee were fixed for hearing on 21.02.2017 but none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said date. Even today, i.e. on 05.07.2017, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee when its appeals were fixed for hearing before the Tribunal nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. It appears from the conduct of the assessee that it is not & 559/KOL./2015 Page 2 of 2 seriously interested in prosecuting these appeals filed 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 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 Holkar –vs.- C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat these appeals as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non- prosecution.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on July 05, 2017.