, A , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.1427/AHD/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 ) M/S. KHEVANA SECURITIES & FINSTOCK LTD. D-.307, PAYAL COMPLEX, SAYAJIGUNJ, BARODA / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1)(4), VADODARA. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABCK5705G ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SMT. APARNA AGRAWAL, CIT-DR / DATE OF HEARING 17/05/2018 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28/ 05 /2018 $% / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANC E OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-1, VADODARA [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 2 9/02/2016 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2011-12. ITA NO.1427/AHD/2017 M/S. KHEVANA SECURITIES & FINSTOCK LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2011-12 - 2 - 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE. NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESS EE BY REGISTERED POST (AD ON RECORD RG255694982 IN) AS PER ADDRESS FURNISHED IN FORM NO.36 WHICH RETURNED UNSE RVED. NO OTHER ADDRESS FOR SERVICE OF NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVID ED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THE BOUNDEN DUTY OF THE ASSESS EE TO MOVE REVISED APPEAL MEMO (FORM NO.36) IN TERMS OF RULE 9 A OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES 1963. THE A SSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DO SO. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY RE PRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, I T CAN BE PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUI NG THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS T O DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P)LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE EXISTED A REASO NABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY, IF SO ADVISED, TO SEEK FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. ITA NO.1427/AHD/2017 M/S. KHEVANA SECURITIES & FINSTOCK LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2011-12 - 3 - 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINE . THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 2 8/ 05/2018 SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP KUM AR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 28 / 05/2018 MUKUL !'# $#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. & '( ) / CONCERNED CIT 4. ) ( ) / THE CIT(A)-GANDHINAGAR 5. ,-. //'( , '(# , 12$&$ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. .34 5 / GUARD FILE. % & / BY ORDER, '/& () ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 23.2.18 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 23.2.18 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.23.2.2018 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 23.2.2018 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER