1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2384 /DEL/2013 AY: 200 4 - 05 KALRAJAN FINVEST AND LEASING P.LTD. VS. DCIT, C.C. 23 C/O PN CHAWLA, ADV. NEW DELHI FLAT NO. 811, NAURANG HOUSE 21 KG MARG NEW DELHI 110 001 PAN: AABCK 6586 D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SH. RISHPAL BEDI, SR.D.R. ORDER PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 28.2.2013 OF LD.CIT(A) - V I, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4 - 05 . 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 18 .11.2015, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED DESPITE ISSUAL OF NOTICE BY RPAD. HENCE IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. HEARD SHRI RIS HPAL BEDI , LD.SR.D.R. ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA P.LTD. 38 ITD, 320 (DELHI), AND THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UOI AND OTHERS IN CENTRAL EXCIS E APPEAL NO. 62/2009 JUDGEMENT DT. 17 TH SEPTEMBER,2009, WE CONSIDER IT A FIT CASE FOR DISMISSING THE APPEALS IN LIMINE, AS NOT ADMITTED. IT IS TO CLARIFY THAT 2 SUBSEQUENTLY, IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON - APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 4 T H DECEMBER ,2015. S D / - S D / - ( KULDIP SINGH ) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: THE 0 4 T H DECEMBER , 2015 * MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR