IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES SMC : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 556/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 B. SIDDULAMMA, PILER CHITTOOR DISTRICT [PAN: ENCPS0981P] VS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), TIRUPATI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : NONE FOR REVENUE : SHRI C. RAJESWARA REDDY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 02-08-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09-08-2019 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE AY.2013-14, AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-TI RUPATI, DATED 05-02-2019. THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 18-04-2019 . ON VERIFICATION ON APPEAL PAPERS, THE REGISTRY OF ITAT HA S POINTED OUT THE FOLLOWING DEFECTS: ITA. NO. 556/HYD/2019 :- 2 -: I. IN FORM 36, COL.NO.3 NOT FILLED, COL.NO.3(A) AND 4 WRONGLY FILLED, COL.NO.10 (TOTAL TAX EFFECT) NOT FILLED AND COL.NO.12 IS INCOMPLETE; II. GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL ARE NOT AS PER ITA T RULES (RULE 8). REVISED GROUNDS TO BE FILED IN TRIPLI CATE; III. REVISED FORM 36 ALONGWITH GROUNDS TO BE FILED IN TRIPLICATE; THE DEFECT MEMO WAS SENT TO ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS GI VEN IN FORM-36. HOWEVER, THE SAID NOTICE HAS BEEN RETURNED B Y THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH A REMARK INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS . FURTHER, THE DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN RECTIFIED BY THE APPELL ANT EVEN AFTER LAPSE OF MORE THAN THIRTY DAYS OF THE NOTICE PUT U P IN THE WEBSITE OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE CASE IS BEING POSTED B EFORE THE BENCH FOR DISMISSAL. THE NOTICE HAS BEEN PUT UP IN TH E NOTICE BOARD AS WELL AS IN THE WEBSITE OF THE TRIBUNAL. FURTHE R, NOTICE WAS ALSO SENT BY SPEED POST ON 08-07-2019 AND AS PER TRACKING OF CONSIGNMENT, IT WAS DELIVERED TO THE ASSESSE E ON 10-07-2019. SINCE NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE TO- DAY, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING AND SINCE THE DE FECTS HAVE NOT BEEN RECTIFIED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS AP PEAL. 2. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHER ENT ITA. NO. 556/HYD/2019 :- 3 -: POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HEL D BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEM IPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THE REFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADE SH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE HAV E NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS N OT MAINTAINABLE. 2.1. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO SEEK RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY WAY OF FILING AN M.A., SHOWING SUFFICIENT REASONS AS TO WHY THE DEFECTS IN APPEAL PAPERS COULD NOT BE RECTIFIED AND ALSO AS TO WHY ASSESSEE DID NOT REPRESENT WHEN POSTED FOR DISM ISSAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ADMITTED AND DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH AUGUST, 2019 SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P. MADHAVI DEVI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER HYDERABAD, DATED 9 TH AUGUST, 2019 TNMM ITA. NO. 556/HYD/2019 :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1. B.SIDDULAMMA, 3-452, LBS ROAD, PILER, CHITTOOR D IST., 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1 ), TIRUPATI. 3. CIT(APPEALS)-TIRUPATI. 4. PR.CIT-TIRUPATI. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.