IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & SHRI WASE EM AHMED, AM] I.T.A NO. 2430/KOL/20 13 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-0 4 BIDHAN CHANDRA DUTTA -VS.- A.C.I.T., CIR CLE-1, HOOGHY HOOGHLY. [PAN : ADAPD 1518 M] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI KALYAN NATH, ADDL. CIT, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.08.2017. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.08.2017. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2013 OF C.I.T.(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA RELATING TO A.Y.2003-04. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 17.05 .2017 AND THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 18.07.2017. BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND THE AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE WERE INFORMED ABOUT THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING. ON 18.07.2017 THE BENCH C BEFORE WHICH THE CASE WAS LISTED DID NOT FUNCTION AND THEREFORE IT WAS INFORMED THRO UGH THE NOTICE BOARD, AS IT IS A USUAL PRACTICE THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WOU LD BE 29.08.2017. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR WAS THERE ANY REQUEST FOR GRANT OF ADJOURNMENT. IT IS ALSO PERTIN ENT TO MENTION THAT FOR THE HEARING ON 13.05.2016, 13.07.2016,16.01.2017 AND 27.03.2017 TH E APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IT APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2 ITA NO.2430/KOL/2013 BIDHAN CHANDRA DUTTA A.YR.2003-04 2 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANC E ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COUR T ON 29.08.2017. SD/- SD/- [WASEEM AHMED] [ N.V.VAS UDEVAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER DATED : 29.08.2017. [RG PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. BIDHAN CHANDRA DUTTA, 48A, DEY STREET, P.O. SERA MPORE, DIST. HOOGHLY-712201. 2. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, HOOGHLY. 3. CIT(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA 4. C.I.T.-XX, K OLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECR ETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHES 3 ITA NO.2430/KOL/2013 BIDHAN CHANDRA DUTTA A.YR.2003-04 3