IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.131/AGRA/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SHRI SATENDRA KUMAR JAIN, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 5(1), 190/28, OM NAGAR, FIROZABAD SHITAL KHAN ROAD, FIROZABAD. (PAN AHRPJ 7553 R). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. BELU SINHA, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 23.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.07.2015 ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-II, AGR DATED 29.11.2013 FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10. 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR H EARING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN S ENT BY REGISTERED POST. FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE ITS CASE. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHA RGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EF FECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HONBLE ITA NO.131/AGRA/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 2 M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN T HE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.07.201 5) SD/- SD/- (G.C. GUPTA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUN TANT MEMBER DATE: 24 TH JULY, 2015 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA