, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , B B ENCH, CHENNAI . , . , $ % BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1092/MDS/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) MR. AHAMEDSAIB BABU, PROP.NO.9, SOUTH VANNIYAR STREET, SHOLINGHUR, WALAJA, VELLORE-631 102. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(6) VELLORE-631 102. PAN: BCRPB7347F ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE /RESPONDENT BY : MR.SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 4 TH JULY, 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 4 TH JULY, 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS)- 13, CHENNAI DATED 17.02.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 250(6) OF THE ACT. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO TH E ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CA RD INTIMATING THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 04.07.2016. THE SAID NOTICE WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS EVIDENT FROM THE RECORD. HOWEVER, AT TH E TIME OF 2 ITA NO.1092/MDS/2016 HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, N OR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. HENCE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN I NDIA P. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON 'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAOHOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE HEREBY DISMISS TH E APPEAL IN LIMINE . 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 4 TH JULY, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) ( G.PAVAN KUMAR) ( A.MOHAN ALANKAMO NY ) # % / JUDICIAL MEMBER % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /CHENNAI, ( /DATED 4 TH JULY, 2016 SOMU *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF