PER BENCH :

1. The above appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A), Belgaum dt. 18.8.2014 for A.Y 2005-06. The appeal was fixed for hearing today and the Assessee was intimated about the hearing vide registered post dt. 21.11.2014. However, the Assessee vide application dt. 20.1.2015 has requested for adjournment. In the absence of any plausible reason given in the adjournment application, the same stands rejected.

2. The laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known dictum VIGILANTBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, as were considered in 38 ITD 320 (Del) in the case of CIT V. 2 ITA NO. 381/PNJ/2014 (A. Y : 2005-06) Multiplan India Ltd. as also in 223 ITR 480 (M.P) in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar V. CWT, we treat the appeal as not admitted.

3. Therefore, following the decision of 38 ITD 320 read with Rule 24 & 25 with 19 of the ITA Rules, we dismiss the appeal for default since we find that the Assessee is not willing to prosecute the appeal. Our view gets support from the judgement of 255 ITR 467 (AP) and 265 ITR 252.

4. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine.

5. Order pronounced in the open court on 22/01/2015. Sd/- (D.T.Garasia) Judicial Member Sd/- (P.K. Bansal) Accountant Member Place : PANAJI / GOA Dated : 22/01/2015 *SSL* Copy to : (1) Appellant (2) Respondent (3) CIT(A) concerned (4) CIT concerned (5) D.R (6) Guard file True copy, By order,