1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL I BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL (JM) AND SHRI RAJENDRA SI NGH(AM) ITA NO.2284/M/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 M/S.BEECHINS CREATIONS PVT. LTD. THE ACIT -8(1), M UMBAI UNIT NO.2, ANDHERI IND.ESTATE VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 053. PAN : AAACB 2280 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI P.N. DEVADASAN O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST OR DER DATED 18.02.2010 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. THE ASSE SSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAD DISPUTED THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C ). HOWEVER NO ONE APPEARED WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING TODAY (31.01.20 11) THOUGH THE NOTICE SENT BY RPAD LONG AGO HAD NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVE D. NEITHER SOME ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNM ENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED. IT CAN THEREFORE BE REASONABLY CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IN SUCH CASES AS HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN CASE OF CHEMIPOLE VS UNION OF IN DIA (EXCISE APPEAL NO.62 OF 2 2009 DATED 17.9.2009) THE COURT AND TRIBUNAL HAVE I NHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE PROCEEDINGS FOR NON PROSECUTION. ON THE FACTS O F THE CASE WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE THEREFORE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 2. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. 3. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TO DAY I.E. 31.01.2011. SD/- SD/- ( D.K. AGARWAL ) (RAJEN DRA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 31.01.2011 AT :MUMBAI COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI CONCERNED 4. THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED 5. THE DR I BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI ALK