, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.1218/AHD/2011 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2002-2003 M/S.SWASTIK INDUSTRIES 157, GIDC, PANDESARA SURAT. PAN : AAKFS 0511 J VS ITO, WARD-6(4) SURAT. ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : PRAJNA PARAMITA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 18/02/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18/02/2016 $%/ O R D E R THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-IV, SURAT DATED 18.01.2011 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2002-2003. 2 . AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE. THE CASE HAS BEEN FIRSTLY LISTED FOR HEARING ON 19.12.2 014. THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME. ON TWO OCCASIONS I.E. ON 3.8.2015 AND 7.1.2016, AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED. LASTLY, THE NOTICE FOR HEARING OF CASE ON 18.2.2016 WAS SENT, W HICH WAS DULY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, AS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT OF POSTAL AUTHORITY HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. HOWEVER, NONE PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT O F THE CASE OR INTIMATED ANY ITA NO.1218/AHD/2011 2 REASON FOR NON-ATTENDANCE. THIS SHOWS THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING WITH THIS APPEAL, AND THEREFORE, BY FOLLOW ING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCH IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LT D., 38 ITD 320 (DELHI), I DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- ( B.P. JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER