KAMAL NAVA SARKAR,S/O-SANKAR NATH SARKAR,MALDA vs. ITO,WARD-2, MALDA, MALDA

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jalpaiguri in appeal No.292/MLD/CIT(A)/JAL/08-09 dated 05.09.2011. Assessment was framed by ITO Ward-2, Range, Malda u/s 145(3)/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 01.12.2008 for assessment year 2006-07.

At the time of hearing today, none appeared on assessee behalf and filed any adjournment application. Prior to that on 26.08.2015 and 27.10.2015 then none appeared on behalf of assessee and filed any adjournment Kamal N Sarkar v. ITO Wd-2 MLD. Page 2 application. Hence, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. In view of the decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (I) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.), Hon’ble MP High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukjirao Holkar Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 and Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills Vs. CIT 296 ITR 495 (P & H) and the Hon’ble Suprme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjee & another 296 ITR 495 (SC), laying down proposition that a litigant has not only to file an appeal but has to prosecute the same diligently and on failure to so prosecute the appeal can be dismissed for non prosecution, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution.