M/s Cotex Co, Hathras v. ITO, Hathras

ITA 568/AGR/2008 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 56820314 RSA 2008
Bench Agra
Appeal Number ITA 568/AGR/2008
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant M/s Cotex Co, Hathras
Respondent ITO, Hathras
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 05-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 30-05-2011
Next Hearing Date 30-05-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 19-08-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.568/AGR./2008 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. COTEX CO. VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER BANS MANDI HATHRAS. WARD 3(4) HATHRAS. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : NONE (ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION REJEC TED) FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI VINOD KUMAR JR. D.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU J.M. : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) GWALIOR DATED 26.11.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1991-92. 2. THE NOTICE FOR HEARING FIXED ON 05.01.2011 WAS I SSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO. 36 COLUMN NO. 10. IN RESPONSE THE ASSESS EE FILED ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION DATED 05.01.2011 ON THE REASONS THAT HI S COUNSEL NEEDS SOME TIME FOR PREPARATION OF THE CASE. 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE REASONS MENTIONED IN TH E APPLICATION AND WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE REASONS MENTIONE D IN THE APPLICATION ARE NOT PLAUSIBLE. THEREFORE THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION I S REJECTED. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE ADJOURN MENTS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE IN 2 THE PAST WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. THE LAW ASSISTS ONLY THOSE WH O ARE VIGILANT OF THEIR RIGHTS AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEM. THIS PRINCIPLE I S EMBODIED IN THE WELL KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIU NT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVIS IONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963 AS WELL AS THE DECISIONS BY THE TRIBUNAL AS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND BY THE HIGHER COURTS AS IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) WE TREAT THE ASSESSEES APPE AL AS UN-ADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.01.2011. SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 5 TH JANUARY 2011 *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) BY ORDER 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. DR ITAT AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY