VIBHA BHARTI JEWELS,ROORKEE vs. ITO, WARD- 2, ROORKEE

In this case the Notice was sent to the assessee for hearing for today i.e. 31.05.2018 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No.

However, the same was returned back with the postal remarks “fy[ks irs ij bl le; dksbZ ugha gsSA“ 3. On 31.05.2018, neither the assessee nor its Authorised Representative attended the hearing and also not filed any Application for adjournment or nor filed the fresh address before the Tribunal, hence, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again on the same address. In view of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of its Appeal.

Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. : 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the Appeal.