Non-prosecution before ITAT can justify dismissal in limine where the assessee fails to appear and pursue the appeal.

Non-appearance by the assessee before the ITAT can justify dismissal in limine for non-prosecution where the appeal is not actively pursued. Applying Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 and the settled principle that filing an appeal alone does not require merits adjudication, the Tribunal treated absence of representation as showing lack of seriousness in prosecution and found the appeal unfit for substantive hearing. It also noted that restoration may be sought if reasonable cause for non-representation is shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal was liable to be dismissed in limine for non-prosecution on account of non-appearance before the Tribunal.

Analysis: The appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared for the assessee. Relying on Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 and the line of authority recognising that an appeal must be effectively pursued and that mere filing does not by itself require adjudication on merits, the Tribunal held that absence of representation showed lack of seriousness in prosecuting the appeal. The Tribunal followed the principle that, in such circumstances, the appeal may be treated as not fit for substantive hearing and dismissed in limine. It also noted that the assessee could seek recall and restoration if reasonable cause for non-representation was shown.

Conclusion: The appeal was rightly dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

---