NAV BHARAT ENTERPRISES,DELHI vs. AC IT, NEW DELHI

However, No one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing, the appeal was passed over. Even in the second round, the position remained the same. The record further shows that the Registry has pointed out a defect in the appeal fee on 27.07.2015 till date the defect remains not cured. In the absence of any presence or request for adjournment despite issuance of notice to the assessee on 06.06.2016. It can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly 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. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). It may be further noted that till the date of passing of this order, no request for adjournment has been placed by the Registry.

Before parting it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order. The said order was pronounced on the date of hearing itself in the open Court.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 20th of September, 2016.