IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-II : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4152/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 PUNEET JAIN, C/O K.K. GARGA, ADVOCATE, 184, ABULANE, MEERUT. PAN: AANPJ4604J VS. ITO, WARD-2(1), MEERUT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : MRS. RAKHI VIMAL, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 13. 08.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.11.2015 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), MEERUT, DATED 14.5.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE ISS UE OF NOTICE BY RPAD. THE NOTICE SENT BY REGISTERED POST HAS BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL ITA NO.4152/DEL/2015 2 AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS NO PERSON BY THIS NAM E AT THIS ADDRESS. SO, RETURNED FOR THE CORRECT ADDRESS. THE DEFECT MEMO ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE THAT TRIBUNAL FEE IS PAID SHORT BY RS.3,768/- HAS N OT BEEN RECTIFIED. THUS, I DISMISS THIS APPEAL AS NOT ADMITTED BY APPLYING T HE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. M ULTIPLAN INDIA (P.) LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DA TE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THA T DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF T HE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.11.201 5. SD/- [J.SUDHAKAR REDDY] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 04 TH NOVEMBER, 2015. ITA NO.4152/DEL/2015 3 DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.