1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 770 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Epcos AG Germany, Nashik ..Respondent None for the appellant. Mr. Murlidharan with Mr. A.K. Jasani for the respondent. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 873 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Thermax Limited ..Respondent None for the appellant. Ms. Arti Sathe for the respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE : 26th June, 2009 P.C. 1 When these matters are called out none present on behalf of the Revenue. 2 The appeals are, therefore, liable to be dismissed in default. Mere dismissal in default would neither serve the ends of justice nor open the eyes of the Income Tax Department. Hence, it is necessary to bring few facts on record to enable the Department to take corrective steps in the matter. 3 On the last date of hearing i.e. on 19th June, 2009 when these matters were called out Ms. Devki Iyer, who is on record, did not appear. It was specifically mentioned in the said order, that this court had noticed in a number of cases, that Ms.Devki Iyer remains absent when the matter filed by her were called out. It was 2 also mentioned in that order, that in her absence other different panel advocates keep on appearing on her behalf. However, none of them expressed their willingness to argue matters allotted to her with the result matters have to be adjourned. Under these circumstances, this court had expressed that the Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune, should consider whether or not her name should be continued on the panel of Income Tax Department, if she is not willing to attend court. 4 Mr. Vimal Gupta, Advocate was directed to communicate this order to Commission of Income Tax, so as to enable Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune, to take corrective steps in the matter and to make alternate arrangement to represent Revenue before this court. Nothing is on record to indicate whether order was communicated to the Commissioner of Income Tax by Mr. Vimal Gupta, Advocate. 5 The Registry is directed to forward the copy of this order immediately to the Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes and Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune for information and further action so as to enable both the authorities to engage and retain Advocates on the panel who are prepared to work for Revenue. There is no point in appointing advocates and taking them on panel, who are neither interested in representing department nor interested in reading the provisions of the Income Tax Act. It, ultimately, affects the administration of justice to a great extent. 6 We hope the authorities will look into the matter and try to protect the interest of the Revenue in the best interest of the nation. 7 Today, when these matters are called out nobody is present. None of the panel advocates is prepared to appear in these matters. Under these circumstances, we have no option but to dismiss both appeals for want of prosecution. Hence, both appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)