No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G. D. AGARWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI A. T. VARKEY
O R D E R
PER A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal filed by the Assessee emanates from the order of Ld. CIT, Meerut, dated 22.03.2013 u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relevant to Assessment Year 2008-09.
Today, i.e. on 05.11.2015 when the case was called on board, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed before the Tribunal. It seems that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution. In our above view, we find support from the following decisions:- “ (i). In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that “The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (ii). In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order: “if the party at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, this court is not bound to answer the reference. (iii). In the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (del). The appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal which was fixed for hearing but on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue / applicant, nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to