MR. SURENDRA PAL CHAUHAN,HAPUR vs. ITO, HAPUR

However, no one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. The appeal was passed over. Even in the second round, the position remained the same as neither the assessee is represented nor there is any adjournment on record. The record shows that on 21.08.2015 that the assessee had moved an adjournment and the date has been noted on behalf o the assessee. The record further shows that on two prior occasions i.e. on 02.02.2016 it was adjourned on the request of the assessee and on 04.04.2016, none was present. Considering the overall facts where the Registry has also pointed out a delay of 89 days. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal as otherwise there is nothing on record to show that the assessee is interested in addressing the delay. Accordingly in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, 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).