9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, the first respondent has rightly passed the order dated 30.12.2014 dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner for non-prosecution. When the appellant did not turn up to agitate the appeal on merits, the first respondent can only conclude that the assessee is not interested to prosecute the appeal. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent on 06.09.2012, 24.09.2012, 22.01.2013 and 20.08.2014. In all those hearings, there was no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the first respondent came to the conclusion that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and consequently dismissed the appeal on 30.12.2014 for non-prosecution. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicate the appeal on merits before the first respondent. 4. On the above contention, this Court heard the learned standing counsel for the respondents, who supported the order dated 30.12.2014 of the first respondent and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. I heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials placed on record. Even though Section 251 of the Income Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to agitate the appeal on merits, the first respondent can only conclude that the assessee is not interested to prosecute the appeal. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the first respondent. However, taking note of the fact that the petitioner has no occasion to challenge the validity of the order passed by the second respondent on 24.12.2010 and as the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
