M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. JCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

However, at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly the appeals were passed over twice. In the third round also, the position remained the same. The record shows that on the last date of hearing i.e. 14.01.2016 the appeals were adjourned on the written request of the assessee and the order sheet notes “Both parties are informed”. Despite this fact fact, no appearance has been put in on behalf of the assessee right upto the date of passing of this order. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss I.T.A .No.-1023 - 1025/Del/2014 & 1064 - 1065/Del/2014 the appeals 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). 3.. 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 appeals of the assessee are dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 09 of June, 2016.