IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
              DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JM
                      ITA Nos.262 & 263/Del/2014
                       Assessment Year : 2008-09

Sai Om Films Pvt. Ltd.,           Vs.          ITO,
546, Bijwasan,                                 Ward-7(1),
New Delhi.                                     Delhi.

PAN: AAKCS0179D


     (Appellant)                            (Respondent)

           Appellant by : None
           Respondent by: Ms Anima Bernwal, Sr.DR

           Date of Hearing      : 11.01.2016
           Date of Pronouncement: 11.01.2016

                                 ORDER

PER SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM:

     These appeals by the assessee are directed against the order passed by

the CIT(A) on 21.10.2013 in relation to Assessment Year 2008-09.



2.   When the matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared

on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has not filed any adjournment

application also. The notice of hearing sent to the assessee has not been
                                                         ITA Nos.262 & 263/Del/2014   2







returned unserved. In these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is

not interested in prosecuting its appeals. The appeals filed by the assessee

are, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our above view

finds support from the following decisions:-

    1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr., 118 ITR 461, wherein their
       Lordships have held:
           "The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but
           effectively pursuing it."

    2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.),
       wherein, while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the
       assessee   in   default,   their   Lordships   made   the     following
       observation:-
           "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 reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference."






    3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD
       320 (Del.),wherein the appeal filed by the revenue before the
       Tribunal, was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody
       represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for
       adjournment was received.          There was no communication or
       information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that
       date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the
       appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provision
       of Rule 19 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.
                                                         ITA Nos.262 & 263/Del/2014   3




3.    In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed for non-

prosecution.

      The decision was pronounced in the open court on 11th January,

      2016.

           Sd/-                                         Sd/-

       (C.M. GARG)                              (R.S. SYAL)
     JUDICIAL MEMBER                          ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 11th January, 2016.

dk

Copy forwarded to

1.   Appellant
2.   Respondent
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR
                                           Dy. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi