Indradev Goods Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs Assessee

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P.K.Bansal, A.M. & Shri Mahavir Singh, J.M.]

I.T.A. No.1215/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-2009

M/s. Indradev Goods Pvt. Ltd. -vs- CIT, Kolkata-I, Kolkata (Appellant) (PAN: AABCI 8136M) (Respondent)

Date of concluding the hearing : 06.05.2015 Date of pronouncing the Order : 06.05.2015

Appearances :For the Assessee : None :For the Department : Shri Ajoy Kr. Singh, CIT, DR

ORDER

Per Shri P.K.Bansal, A.M.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.03.2013 of ld. CIT, Kolkata-I, Kolkata for the assessment year 2008-2009.

2. During the course of hearing nobody was present on behalf of the assessee, although the notice for hearing was sent by registered post to the assessee vide RPAD on 20.03.2015. On earlier several occasions, the appeal was fixed for hearing but the assessee did not appear. In this context, it is mentioned that every time the notice sent to 1 2 ITA No.1215/Kol/2013 Indradev Goods Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2008-09

the assessee's address, given in Form no.36, has been returned by the postal department with the remark "Not Known". This time also, the assessee did not appear at the time of hearing nor even it submitted any application for adjournment. It, therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested to prosecute the matter.

3. The law aids those who are vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum, "VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT'. Considering the facts and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), we treat this appeal as unadmitted.

4. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) wherein it has been held as under:

"if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference."

5. Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee.

3 ITA No.1215/Kol/2013 Indradev Goods Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2008-09

6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.

7. So by respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.

8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 6th May, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (P.K.Bansal) Judicial Member Accountant Member th Dated : 6 May, 2015

Talukdar(Sr.P.S.)

Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. M/s. Indradev Goods Pvt. Ltd., 3, Saklat Place, 2nd floor, Kolkata -

700 069 2 CIT, Kolkata-I, Kolkata

3. The CIT(A),

4. CIT,

5. DR, True Copy, By order,

Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata 4 ITA No.1215/Kol/2013 Indradev Goods Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2008-09