- (1.) THIS appeal gives rise to the following substantial question of law: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal preferred by the present appellant as not maintainable in view of Rules 19 and 20 of the IT (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, and the decision of the Tribunal, Delhi Bench, in the case of CIT v. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del)?
(2.) SINCE the aforesaid question of law is short, by the consent of the parties, this appeal itself is heard and disposed of at this stage. It is not in dispute that the appeal being ITSA No. 112/Jp/2001 was preferred by the assessee, aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), dt. 25th Sept., 2001, to the extent the additions were made in the trading account. It is also not in dispute that on the date when the aforesaid appeal came up for consideration before the Tribunal, neither the assessee nor his representative was present.
(3.) IT may be noted here that notice for hearing of appeal as required under Rules 19 and 20 was given to the appellant assessee.;