IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                        DELHI BENCH: `A' NEW DELHI

             BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                               AND
            SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                       I.T.A .No.-566/Del/2011
                     (ASSESSMENT YEAR-1997-98)

     Anil laul,                         vs ITO,
     Prop. Anangpur Building Centre,       Ward-38(1),
     Khera Dhumaspur, Faridabad-121003.    New Delhi
     PAN-AABPL5211H
     (APPELLANT)                           (RESPONDENT)

                  Appellant by    None
                  Respondent by   Sh.K.K.Jaiswal, Sr.DR


                        Date of Hearing       11.08.2015
                     Date of Pronouncement    11.08.2015


                                    ORDER

PER DIVA SINGH, JM

     The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated
09.12.2010 of CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi pertaining to 1997-98 assessment year,
although the impugned order is a consolidated order for 1997-98 & 2000-01
assessment year.     Various grounds have been raised by the assessee in the
present appeal.






2.   However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the
assessee. The record shows that notice for the date of hearing was sent to the
assessee on 10.07.2015 at the address mentioned in Column No.-10. Despite
this fact, no one was present.    The appeal was passed over.    The position
remained the same in the second round also. Accordingly in the absence of any
representation or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed   that the
assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal. In the circumstances,
the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine.
                                                              I.T.A .No.-566/Del/2011


Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income-
Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao
Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P).






3.    Before parting it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to
show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of
hearing then it may if so advised pray for a recall of this order and decisions on
merits. Respectfully following the order of ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India)
Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we hold the appeal to be unadmitted with the liberty to
assessee to move appropriate application and correct the defect whatsoever in
the memo about its address to ensure a proper hearing of the appeal. The said
order was pronounced on the date of hearing itself in the open Court.
4.    As a result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
      The order is pronounced in the open court on 11th of August, 2015.

      Sd/-                                                                Sd/-

(INTURI RAMA RAO)                                                  (DIVA SINGH)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                             JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 11/08/2015
*Amit Kumar*

Copy forwarded to:

1.    Appellant
2.    Respondent
3.    CIT
4.    CIT(Appeals)
5.    DR: ITAT
                                                        ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                                              ITAT NEW DELHI




                                                                           Page 2 of 2