CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, SHAMLI,GORAKHPUR vs. JCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

However at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was passed over. Even in the second round, the position remained the same. The record shows that on the last occasion i.e. 31.08.2016, the assessee was not present and notice for the specific date of hearing was given on 26.10.2016 which had been sent on 05.09.2016 to the address of the assessee indicated in Column No.10. It has not come back unserved. Accordingly in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case where despite notice the assessee chooses not to be present or represented, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed 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 in limine. The order is pronounced in the open court on 17th of November, 2016.