Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU
O R D E R
Per PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM :
The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-I, Bengaluru, dated 29/02/2016 for the assessment year 2011-12.
At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor an adjournment application has been filed. On perusal of records, it was found that the notice of hearing sent by registered letter, fixing the case for hearing on 04/02/2019 was returned by the postal authorities with the remarks ‘door locked’. Vakalathnama has been filed on record and on earlier
Page 2 of 2 occasions also, learned AR for assessee sought adjournments. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and accordingly dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, for non-prosecution.