Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH
(PAN : AAAFB2814R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 08.10.2018 Date of Order : 08.10.2018
O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
The appellant, Balaji Fruit Company, by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 16.03.2015 passed by Ld. Pr. CIT, Delhi-12, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2011-12.
In the present appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 18.07.2018 and the case was adjourned to 25.10.2018 as the Bench was not functioning. The notice for the next date of hearing i.e. 25.10.2018 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.
In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. Order pronounced in open court on this 25th day of October, 2018 after the conclusion of the hearing.