PRADEEP ARYA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 35(3), NEW DELHI

On the last date of hearing the appeal was adjourned as none appeared on behalf of the assessee and a notice has been issued to the assessee, which has been returned un-served by the postal authorities with the remark “No such person”. However, even today i.e., on 03.12.2018, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application 2 ITA.No.2044/Del./2018 Shri Pradeep Arya, Delhi. seeking for adjournment has been filed. It is the duty of the assessee to give proper address by filing Revised Form-36 in case of any change of address. Since, no steps have been taken by the assessee, it appears that assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal of assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.

In view of the above and having regard to Rule 19(2) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and also the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) wherein their Lordships held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. Respectfully following the same, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as un-admitted.

3 ITA.No.2044/Del./2018 Shri Pradeep Arya, Delhi. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.