SRI.VENUGOPAL V,CHERTHALA vs. THE ITO, ALAPPUZHA

PER GEROGE GEORGE K, JM:

This appeal, at the instance of the assessee, is directed against the

CIT(A)’s order dated 10.1.2014. The relevant assessment year is 2008-09.

2 At the time of hearing of this appeal none appeared on behalf of the

assessee though the notice has been served on the assessee. There is not even

an adjournment petition received from the assessee. In the circumstances, it

appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal, and no useful

purpose would be served by adjourning the hearing. Considering these facts

and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules, as were

ITA No. 239/C/2014

considered in the case of Multiplan India, reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del) and in

view of the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of

Late Tukoji Rao Holkar, reported in 223 ITR 480, we dismiss the appeal in limine.

However, if the assessee on a later stage gives explanation in regard to its non-

appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing before the Tribunal by

filing a Miscellaneous Application as per the ITAT Rules and if the Bench is so

satisfied the appeal of the assessee can be recalled for hearing on merit.

3 In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 23rd day of March 2017.

Sd/- Sd/-

(ABRAHAM P GEORGE) (GEORGE GEORGE K) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Cochin: Dated 23rd March 2017 Raj*

Copy to: 1. Appellant – 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT, 5. DR 6. Guard File By order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, COCHIN