Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules: non-appearance may justify treating an appeal as unadmitted despite hearing notice.

Mere issuance of a hearing notice under Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 does not amount to admission of an appeal. Where the appellant fails to appear on the appointed date, the appeal may be treated as defective and unadmitted, consistent with the principle applied in Multiplan. The Tribunal noted that the assessee may still move an application explaining the non-appearance, but persistent absence can justify disposal as unadmitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal could be treated as unadmitted and dismissed for non-appearance, and whether Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 permits such disposal.

Analysis: Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 provides that notice of hearing does not by itself mean that the appeal has been admitted. Relying on the principle recognised in Multiplan, the Tribunal held that where the appellant does not appear on the appointed date, the appeal is defective and can be treated as unadmitted. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee may move an application explaining the non-appearance.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be unadmitted and was dismissed on that basis, with liberty to the assessee to explain the non-appearance.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere issuance of notice of hearing under Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 does not amount to admission of the appeal, and persistent non-appearance may justify treating the appeal as unadmitted.

---