M/S DHANOOLALL & SONS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In this case, the appeal filed by the assessee was initially fixed for hearing on 30.11.2016. The assessee, however, sought adjournment on the said date and accordingly the hearing was adjourned to 02.01.2017. It was also noted that there were no grounds of appeal filed by the assessee along with the appeal memo. The assessee accordingly was directed by the Bench to remove the said defect by filing the grounds of appeal before the next date of hearing fixed on 02.01.2017. On 02.01.2017, i.e. today, none, however, has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. Even the defect in this appeal filed by the assessee as pointed out earlier has not been removed ./2014 Assessment year: 2007-2008 Page 2 of 2 by the assessee by filing the grounds of appeal. It appears from this conduct of the assessee that it is not seriously interested in prosecuting this appeal 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 this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non- prosecution.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on January 02, 2017.