ITA NO. 4882/DEL/2010 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH I: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4882/DEL/2010 A.Y. 2007-08 M/S WIN WIN TRADERS PVT. LTD. VS. ITO, WARD 18(3), 61, NEW OFFICERS COLONY, C.R. BUILDING, PATIALA, NEW DELHI PUNJAB [PAN : AAACW6546J) [PAN : AAACW6546J) [PAN : AAACW6546J) [PAN : AAACW6546J) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : MS. BANITA DEVI NAOREM, SR. D.R. O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATE D 11.10.2010 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- XXI, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THIS CASE WAS LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L ON 03-03-2011 AND FOR THIS ASSESSEE WAS INFORMED. TODAY I.E. ON 03-3-2011 W HEN THE CASE WAS CALLED ON BOARD, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSE E NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL D ESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN ITA NO. 4882/DEL/2010 2 PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL; HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER , REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LOR DSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEA L BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CW T; 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTA NCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MAD E, 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 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEA RING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICAT ION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATIO N OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSE NT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, T REATED THE APPEAL ITA NO. 4882/DEL/2010 3 FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN-ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE P ROVISIONS 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 NO N-COMPLIANCE ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DISMISSED, FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/3/2011 UPON CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - [RAJPAL YADAV) [RAJPAL YADAV) [RAJPAL YADAV) [RAJPAL YADAV) [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 03/3/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES