Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Brief :
Despite sending notice of hearing sufficiently in advance, neither assessee attended nor any adjournment request has been received. Thus, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal
Citation :
Sh. Jugnu Singhal, S/o Sh. Daya Prakash Singhal, 192, Nai Mandi Pucca Bagh, Hapur (PAN/GIR No.AVFPS8968M)(Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward 1,Hapur. (Respondent)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH `D’: NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.1228/Del./2012
(Assessment Year: 2007-08)
Sh. Jugnu Singhal,
S/o Sh. Daya Prakash Singhal,
192, Nai Mandi Pucca Bagh,
Hapur
(PAN/GIR No.AVFPS8968M)
(Appellant)
Vs.
ITO, Ward 1,
Hapur.
(Respondent)
Assessee by: None
Revenue by: Shri Shumana Sen, Sr.DR
ORDER
PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M.
This appeal of the assessee emanates from the order of the CIT (A)-XVI, Ghaziabad dated 27.01.2012, relevant to assessment year 2007-08.
2. Despite sending notice of hearing sufficiently in advance, neither assessee attended nor any adjournment request has been received. Thus, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.
3. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules, 1963 and following various decisions of the Tribunal including in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 I.T.R. 480 (MP), we treat the appeal of the assessee as unadmitted and dismiss the same.
4. As a result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order pronounced in open court soon after the conclusion of the hearing on 03.09.2012.
Sd/- Sd/-
(T.S. KAPOOR) (U.B.S. BEDI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: Sept. 03, 2012
SKB
Copy of the order forwarded to:-
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A), Ghaziabad.
5. CIT(ITAT)
Deputy Registrar, ITAT
CAclubindia
