Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member - This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT-(A)-II Nasik dated 25-11-2009 for A.Y. 2001-02 on various grounds.

2. The notices of hearing sent to the assessee at the address given in Form No. 36, were received back unserved. Therefore notices of hearing were given to the departmental representative for effective service on the respondent assessee. However on the dates of hearing no intimation was given by the ld. DR whether service of the notice had been effected on the assessee or not. Last such notice of hearing fixing the date of hearing as 17-4-2010 was handed over to the DR well in advance of the date of hearing. However when the appeal was called on for hearing, none put in an appearance on behalf of the respondent assessee. Shri Alok Mishra the learned DR who was present on behalf of the Revenue when asked about the service on the respondent-assessee was unable to say whether service had been effected or not. Department has shown total apathy in the matter of service of notices of hearing. Accordingly the appeal of the Revenue could not be heard on merit in absence of service of notice upon assessee. It sho