SHRI SURESHBHAI DALPATBHAI DESAI, HUF,,MUMBAI vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PALANPUR

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद �यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3020/Ahd/2014 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Sureshbhai Dalpatbhai ITO बनाम/ Desai HUF Ward 1 Palanpur Vs. C/o. Income Tax Office 2nd 18, Shankar Mahal, Sophia College, Lane, Floor, Shri Hari Complex, Beach Candy Line, Abu Highway, Palanpur- Mumbai- 400026 385001 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAE HD4 093 E .. (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��यथ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : None ��यथ� क� ओर से / Vinod Tanwani, Sr. DR Respondent by : सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 05/03/2019 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 06/03/2019 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 28.08.2014 arising in the assessment order dated 13.11.2013 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2009-10.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant- assessee. Case file reveals that the Registry has already sent an RPAD

ITA No. 3020/Ahd/14[Sureshbhai D. Desai HUF vs. ITO] A.Y. 2009-10 - 2 - notice dated 04.02.2019 to assessee. None appeared for assessee on earlier occasion also without any intimation. In the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P)Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.).

Before parting, it would be appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there existed a reasonable cause for non- representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty, if so advised, to seek for a recall of this order.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed in limine.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 06/03/2019

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 06/03/2019 Tanmay True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

SHRI SURESHBHAI DALPATBHAI DESAI, HUF,,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PALANPUR