MONIKA,SUNDERGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.58/CTK/2016

CIT (Exemptions), 5th floor, Monika, At: Jalda, ‘A’ Block, Vs. PO; Jalda C. Rourkela. Posnett Bhawan, Tilak Road, Ramkoti, Hyderabad. PAN/GIR No.AADAM 8112 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR

Date of Hearing : 10/08/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 10/08/ 2017

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT

(Exemptions), Hyderabad, dated 30.11.2015.

2 The notice dated 19.7.2017 fixing the hearing on 10.8.2017 sent by Speed Post has been returned back unserved with the postal remarks “Insufficient name and address”. The notice was sent at the address given in Form No.36 by the assessee filed before the Tribunal. No other address is placed on record by the assessee. Under the above circumstances, we presume that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. While taking this view, we derive the support from the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd., 38 ITD 320.

2 ITA No.58/CTK/2016 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10 /08/2017.

(Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated /08/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Monika, At: Jalda, ‘A’ Block, PO; Jalda C. Rourkela 2. The Respondent. CIT (Exemptions), 5th floor, Posnett Bhawan, Tilak Road, Ramkoti, Hyderabad 3. The CIT(A)- 4. Pr.CIT- 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack