, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, B BENCH . . , , ! . ' . #$ , % ' ITA NO.1813/AHD/2009 [ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-2006] HEMANTSINH GAMBHIRSINH PARMAR PROPRIETOR OF SHIV CONSTRUCTION AT & PO LUWARA, TAL VAGRA DIST. BHARUCH 382 120. /VS. ITO, WARD-2 BHARUCH. ( &' / APPELLANT) ( (#&' / RESPONDENT) )* + , ' / ASSESSEE BY : NONE % + , ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI SAMIR TEKRIWAL -. + */ / DATE OF HEARING : 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2011 012 + */ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2011 '3 / O R D E R G.D. AGARWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-VI, BARODA DAT ED 13.03.2009 ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) R.W.S. 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOT ICE FOR HEARING OF THE CASE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM NO.36 BY REGISTERED AD POST. HOWEVER, THE NOTICE WAS RETURNED UNSERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORIT Y WITH THE REPORT LEFT WITHOUT ADDRESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICAT ION OR INTIMATED REASON FOR NON- APPEARANCE IN THE MATTER OR CHANGE OF ADDRESS IF AN Y. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSING ITS APPEA L. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. 38 ITD 320 , WE DISMISS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( . .. .' '' ' . .. .#$ #$ #$ #$ /D.K. TYAGI) % % % % /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . G.D. AGARWAL) /VICE-PRESIDENT