MRS. SARLA MITTAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

However, at the time of hearing, an adjournment was moved on the health ground of the ld.AR. The record shows that the present appeal came up for hearing on six different occasions i.e. 26.05.2015; 24.06.2015; 27.07.2015; 26.10.2015; 03.12.2015; 27.12.2015 and once again on 10.02.2016. It is seen that on two of the above occasions i.e. 26.05.2015 and 26.01.2015, the Bench was not functional. However, on the four remaining occasions the appeal was adjourned on the request of the counsel. The record shows that on each of these dates adjournment was sought on the grounds of health. It is further borne out from the record that the Registry had pointed out a defect on 11.09.2014 in the appeal filed by the assessee in regard to the deposit of appeal fee which till date remains not cured. In these circumstances, it is found that since even the defect remains uncured till date eminently shows that the I.T.A .No.-804/Del/2014 assessee may not be serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly, the adjournment request of the assessee was rejected dismissing the appeal in limine. Permission is granted to the assessee to pray for a recall of this order incase the assessee so desires by taking appropriate steps to cure the defects pointed out. Accordingly, in terms of the pronouncements the appeal is dismissed in limine. Liberty is granted to the assessee to recall this order by taking appropriate steps to cure the defect pointed out. The Co-ordinate Bench considering the petition if so moved, if so satisfied that the defects have been cured may recall this order. The said order was pronounced in the open Court in the presence of the parties.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine.