Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
Assessee by : None Revenue by: Sh. SK Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/01/2017 Date of pronouncement 20/02/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. This is appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), XXIV, new 1. Delhi dated 20.01.2014 confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Today, i.e. on 09/01/2017 when this case was called on board, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed before the Tribunal. It seems that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution. In our above view, we find support from the following decisions:- (i). In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that “The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (ii). In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order: “if the party at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper