IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI JASON P. BOAZ , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 276 / NAG /201 2 (ASST. YEAR : 20 0 7 - 0 8 ) GOPAL L. KONDAWAR, 402, HARE KRISHNA ENCLAVE, RAMDASPETH, NAGPUR. V S . A CIT, CIRCLE - 5 , SARAF CHAMBERS, SADAR, NAGPUR . PAN NO. ABWPK 9056 B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.K. BARAL SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12 / 0 7 /201 8 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 / 0 7 /201 8 . O R D E R PER JASON P. BOAZ , A M : TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - II , NAGPUR , DATED 27/01/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 . 2. THIS APPEAL CAME FOR HEARING ON 12 /07/2018. THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO. 36. NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING . NEITHER AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE 2 ITA NO. 276 / NAG/2012 ( GOPAL L KONDAWAR ) IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - 1) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2) IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT , 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER: - IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, 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 REFERENCE. 3) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLA N INDIA (P) LTD. , 38 ITD 320 (DELHI), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON T HAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN - ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 . 3 ITA NO. 276 / NAG/2012 ( GOPAL L KONDAWAR ) 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON - COM P LIANCE ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 12 TH DAY OF JULY , 201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - ( SANDEEP GOSAIN ) ( JASON P. BOAZ ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 12 TH JULY , 201 8 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE GOPAL L. KONDAWAR, 402, HARE KRISHNA ENCLAVE, RAMDASPETH, NAGPUR. 2. THE REVENUE A CIT, CIRCE - 5, SARAF CHAMBERS, SADAR, NAGPUR. 3. THE CIT - III, NAGPUR. 4. THE CIT(A) - II, NAGPUR. 5. THE D.R . , NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, NAGPUR (ON TOUR)