INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                        DELHI BENCH "F": NEW DELHI
                BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                                    AND
                    SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                                 ITA No. 2199/Del/2013
                               (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

                P.D. Memorial Religious &              ACIT
                Educational Association,               Central Circle-II
                Distt-Jhajjar, Haryana,          Vs.   Faridabad
                PAN: AAATP3857G

                    (Appellant)                        (Respondent)

                                 Appellant by : None
                              Respondent by   : Mrs. Meenakshi Vohra, Sr. DR


                                       ORDER

PER A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

      This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld
CIT(Central)-Gurgaon dated 25.02.2013 for the Assessment Year 2007-08.

2.    Today, i.e. on 01.04.2014 when the case was called on board, none
appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been
filed before the Tribunal.        It seems that the assessee is not interested in
prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be
un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution. In our above view, we find
support from the following decisions:-






      (i).    In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461
              (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that
              "The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively
              pursuing it."
      (ii).   In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480
              (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of
              assessee in default made following observations 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, this court is
              not bound to answer the reference.
                                         Page No. 2

        (iii).   In the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (del). The
                 appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal which was fixed for
                 hearing but on the date of hearing nobody represented the
                 revenue / applicant, nor any communication for adjournment was
                 received. There was no communication or information as to why
                 revenue choose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the
                 basis of inherent power treated the appeal filed by the revenue as
                 un-admitted in view of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules,
                 1963.
3.      Therefore, keeping in view the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is
dismissed for non-prosecution. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free to move
this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order and explaining the reasons for
non-compliance etc. and if the Bench is so satisfied about the reasons etc,
then this order shall be recalled.






4.      In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed.
        Order pronounced in the open court on 01.04.2014.

               -Sd/-                                                  -Sd/-
        (R.S. SYAL)                                              (A. T. VARKEY)
      ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                        JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated:01 /04/2014

A K Keot

Copy forwarded to

     1. Applicant
     2. Respondent
     3. CIT
     4. CIT (A)
     5. DR:ITAT
                                                               ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                                                  ITAT, New Delhi