1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH (B) BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 1004/CHD/2009 HARYANA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, V CIT, BAY NO.15-18, SECTOR 2, PANCHKULA. PANCHKULA. PAN : AAATH-7482H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA DATED 31.08.2009. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22.09.2011 B UT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT NOR ANY RE QUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. 3. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE IN STANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMIS SED. 4. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHA RGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 46L [ RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) 2 WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 5. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO: I) CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD: 38 ITD 320 (DE L) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT: 223 ITR 480(MP) 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS [SUPRA], WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 8. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH SEPT.,2011 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (MEHAR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 27 TH SEPT.,2011 POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT, 2. THE RESPONDENT, 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT 5. THE D.R, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, CHANDIGARH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH