SUPER AUTO FORGE PRIVATE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Both the appeals of the assessee are directed against the respective order of CIT(A) -15, Chennai for the Assessment Years 2009- 10 & 2010-11. Since common issue arises for consideration in both the appeals, we heard the same together and disposing off the same by this common order.

When both the appeals are taken up for hearing on 11.08.2016, no one appeared for the assessee even though the notice of hearing was served on the assessee by R.P.A.D. The Registry has placed on record the postal acknowledgement as a proof of service of notice of hearing.

There may be various reasons for the assessee for not appearing before this Tribunal on 11.08.2016 when the appeal was taken up for hearing. One of the reasons, presumably, the assessee may not be interested in prosecuting this appeal in further. Whatever may be the reason, by keeping the provisions to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, in mind, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed for non-prosecution. However, it is made clear that it is open to the assessee to move this Tribunal for recall of this order provided there is sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not appearing before this Tribunal on 11.08.2016 when the appeal was taken up for hearing.

With the above observation, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.