SHRI BHUPINDERJIT SINGH SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 09.03.2015 of CIT(A)-15, Delhi pertaining to 2010–11 assessment year on various grounds. However, at the time of hearing, an adjournment application was moved by the assessee stating that “Respectfully it is submitted to please Adjourn the case and oblige”. Sh. H.S.Ratra, CA was appearing on behalf of the assessee was required to address the reasons for seeking an adjournment as the application moved is silent thereon; he was also required to address why the defect pointed out by the Registry in regard to the Tribunal fee on 03.12.2015 till date has not been cured. No reasons were given by the Ld.AR. The record shows that the appeal has come up for hearing on three different occasions, wherein on 28.07.2016 it was adjourned as no was present on behalf of the assessee; on 15.09.2016 it was adjourned on the request of the assessee’s counsel; and on 07.11.2016 it was again adjourned on the written request of the assessee and some office trainee who had been sent in support of the petition moved, on the said date, was reminded that the defect on record remained not cured. The specific order sheet entry is reproduced hereunder:- “07th Nov. 2016: Adj. to 10th Nov. 2016. Ld.AR directed to cure the defect by the next date. Ms. Priya Sehgal, Office trainee present to take a date. Mr. F. R.Meena, Sr.DR for Revenue. Read out in the Tribunal.” Sd/- (Judicial Member) 2.1. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal, Accordingly in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P).