Appeal unadmitted for want of proper prosecution and defective address, with liberty to rectify and reapply.

An appeal may be treated as unadmitted and dismissed in limine where the appellant fails to pursue it, no one appears despite repeated calls, and the address furnished in the memorandum is defective or no longer valid. Applying Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, the Tribunal noted that mere issuance of notice does not itself admit an appeal; proper prosecution and a workable address remain necessary. As the notice returned with the remark that the assessee had left without address and no adjournment was sought, the appeal was dismissed in limine, with liberty to rectify the defect and make an appropriate application.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was liable to be treated as unadmitted and dismissed in limine for want of proper prosecution and for defect in the appellant's address.

Analysis: The appeal was called on for hearing, but none appeared for the assessee despite repeated passes over and no adjournment request. The notice sent to the address furnished in the memorandum of appeal returned with the remark that the assessee had left without address. In these circumstances, the Tribunal applied Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 and followed the view that issuance of notice does not by itself make an appeal admitted. It held that where the appellant does not provide a proper address and does not pursue the appeal, the appeal remains defective and can be treated as unadmitted.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be unadmitted and was dismissed in limine, with liberty to the assessee to rectify the defect and move an appropriate application.

---