BISHAN PARKASH,HARYANA vs. CIT, HISAR

The appellant, Shri Bishan Parkash, by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 30.03.2014 passed by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hisar qua the Assessment Year 2009-10.

In the present appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 31.10.2016 and the case was adjourned to 11.01.2017 as the Bench was not functioning. The notice for the next date of hearing i.e. 11.01.2017 was also sent through RPAD but the appellant has not preferred to put in his appearance himself or through his authorized representative nor sent any request for adjournment. So, it is apparent on record that the appellant is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting his appearance at the time of hearing. 5. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. Order pronounced in open court on this 12th day of January, 2017.