IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1133/HYD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 M/S. LUVISH INFOTECH PROJECTS (P) LTD., HYDERABAD VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE 16(2), HYDERABAD APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V. SRINIVAS DATE OF HEARING : 14.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.9.2011 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) V DATED 2.7 .2010 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING TO-DAY I.E. ON 14.9.2011. THIS DATE OF HEARING WAS NOTED BY THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL ON EARLIER OCCASION OF HEARING I .E. ON 7.6.2011, INITIALLY WHEN THE CASE WAS POSTED. IN S PITE OF THIS, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. HE NCE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERES TED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. AS HELD BY THE HONBLE ITA T, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITE D (38 ITD 320), THERE MAY BE VARIOUS REASONS FOR THE ASSE SSEE TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE R EASONS ITA NO.1133/HYD/2010 M/S LUVISH INFOTECH PROJECTS P LTD., HYDERABAD 2 MIGHT BE A DESIGN OR ABSENCE OF NEED TO PROSECUTE T HE APPEAL. BY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION AND CONSIDE RING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE DIS MISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 14.9.2011 SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN) SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED THE 14 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S LUVISH INFOTECH PROJECTS (P) LTD., SILICON TOW ERS, KONDAPUR VILLAGE, MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD-500 032 2. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 16(2), HYDERABAD 3. THE CIT(A)-VI, HYDERABAD 4. THE CIT, HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD NP/