IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & HONBLE SHR I M.BALAGANESH, AM ] I.T.A NO. 971/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-1 1 SINGHI & CO. -VS.- ACIT, CIRCLE-54, KOLK ATA [PAN : AASFS 9578 D] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI ARINDAM BHATTACHAR JEE, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 20.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.02.2018 ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH, AM: 1. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD CITA] IN APPEAL NO.168/CIT(A)-6/KOL/13-14 DATED 02.03.2016 P ASSED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ACIT, CIRCLE-54, KOLKATA [IN SHORT T HE LD. AO] UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS THE ACT) DATED 30.03.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT BEFORE US VIDE L ETTER DATED 22.11.2017 IN RESPECT OF HEARING ON 23.11.2017 AND THE CASE WAS A DJOURNED TO 15.01.2018. THE 2 ITA NO.971/KOL/2016 SINGHI & CO. A.YR.2010-11 2 ASSESSEE SOUGHT FURTHER ADJOURNMENT VIDE LETTER DAT ED 12.01.2018 FOR THE HEARING ON 15.01.2018 AND THE CASE WAS FURTHER ADJOURNED TO 20.02.2018 I.E. TODAY. WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING TODAY NONE APPEARE D ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THIS APPEAL . HENCE THIS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUT ION. FOR THIS VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRJEE 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. 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 O F 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 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. THE RE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAI N ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED T HE 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.971/KOL/2016 SINGHI & CO. A.YR.2010-11 3 3. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRE, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER BY EXPLAINING WITH PROPER REAS ONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE, 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 COURT ON 20.02.2018 SD/- SD/- [A.T.VARKEY] [ M.BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 20.02.2018 SB, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SINGHI & CO., 1B, OLD POST OFFICE STREET, KOLKAT A-700001 2. ACIT, CIRCLE-54, KOLKATA, 54/1, RAFI AHMED KIDWA I ROAD, KOLKATA-700016. 3.CIT(A)- KOLKATA 4. CIT-KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVA TE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHE S