Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY
PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. This is an appeal by the Assessee against the orders dated 10.03.2015 in Appeal No. 164/2014-15 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals)-19, New Delhi (for short hereinafter called “Ld. CITA”).
When the matter is called today, there is no representation on behalf of the assessee. The notice sent to the assessee by registered post on the address recorded in Form No.36 submitted by the assessee with prepaid postage returned with the endorsement of the postal authorities “left”. In this situation no purpose would be served by ordering notice against to the same address. No new address is available
2 now. There is neither any application for adjournment nor for change of address in the record. In view of above, it is presumed that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
We find support from the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del) wherein there was no representation for the appellant in the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, on the date of hearing, nor any communication for adjournment was received as to why the appellant had chosen to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. Respectfully following the said decision, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.
The assessee, if so desire, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons then this order may be recalled.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th June, 2018 (R.S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26 .06.2018 VJ