SH. NARESH KAKAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

However, No one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing, the appeal was passed over twice. Even in the third round, the position remained the same. Neither anyone was present nor any request for adjournment has been placed before us. The record shows that the defect pointed out by the Registry remains uncured. It is further seen that the notice sent to the assessee on 15.07.2016 at the address indicated in Column No.10, has also come back with the comment “left”. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time right till the date of passing of this order, 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).

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 30th of August, 2016.