DINESH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 22(3), NEW DELHI

None was present on behalf of the appellant despite the date of hearing was adjourned to 26.12.2018 on the written request of assessee’s counsel Shri Ajit Kumar Jha. No adjournment request has come on record before us. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that the assessee is not serious in pursuing its appeal. Our this view further stands garnished from the written application dated 26.12.2018 of assessee’s counsel to the effect that no instruction has been given by the assessee to him to prosecute the appeal even after so many calls made to the assessee. In the circumstances, the only alternative left with us is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP).

Before parting, we think it appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, then it may, if so advised, pray for recall of this order and decision on merits.