, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI ., !' #$ . # % & !' ' BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1605/MDS./2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI R.GANESAN , OLD NO.35A,NEW NO.107, VANNIER STREET, CHOOLAIMEDU, CHENNAI 600 094. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD V(1), CHENNAI. [PAN AECPG 9118 F ] ( () / APPELLANT) ( *+() /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE /RESPONDENT BY : MR.SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 16 - 0 8 - 201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 - 0 8 - 2016 !, / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST A N ORDER DATED 29.03.2016 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -14, CHENNAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ITA NO. 1605/MDS./2016 :- 2 -: 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, NOBOD Y APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 23.06.16. FROM THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD OF THE POST OFFICE PLACED ON RECORD, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF HEARING ON 24.06.2016. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS CASE. FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. ( 38 ITD 320 )(DEL.), WE DIS MISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 16TH AUGUST, 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - ( ! . ' ) ( G.PAVAN KUMAR ) & !' / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( #$%&' ' !(! ) ( ABRAHAM P GEORGE ) !' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER )* / CHENNAI +, / DATED: 16 TH AUGUST, 2016 K S SUNDARAM ,-$$ ./$0/ / COPY TO: $ 1 . / APPELLANT 4. $ 1 / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. /23$ 4 / DR 3. $ 1$56 / CIT(A) 6. 37$8 / GF