IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES C, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. D.MANMOHAN (V.P.) AND SHRI. RAJENDRA S INGH (A.M.) ITA NO.2357/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-2004 PRADIP PACHERIWALA 384-M, DABHOLKARWADI, KALBADEVI RD., MUMBAI 400 002. PAN : AAAPP6796L VS. ITO 14(2)-2 AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. RD., MUMBAI 400 020. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI NONE. (AR) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O.P. SINGH (DR) O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 16.01.2009 OF LEARNED CIT (A)-XIV, MUMBAI FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2003- 2004. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRE SENT THE CASE WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR THE HEARING. A LETTER SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS SENT THROUGH SOMEONE WHO WAS NOT EVEN AUTHORISE D TO APPEAR TO THE TRIBUNAL. THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS THERE FORE REJECTED. WE ALSO NOTE THAT EARLIER ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON TWO OCCASIONS. IT CAN THEREFORE BE REASONABLY CONCLUD ED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PERUSING THE APPEAL. IN SUCH A C ASE AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT, MUMBAI IN THE CASE, OF CHEMIPOL VS. UOI IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009, THE TRIBUNAL HAS INHERITENT POWER T O DISMISS THE PROCEEDINGS FOR NON PROSECUTION. ON FACTS OF THE CASE WE ARE CONVINCED ITA NO.2357/MUM/2009 A.Y.: 2003-2004 2 THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PERUSING THE APPEAL . WE THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF JULY, 2010. SD/- (D. MANMOHAN) (VICE PRESIDENT) SD/- (RAJENDRA SINGH) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 15 TH JULY, 2010. JANHAVI COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- XIV, MUMB AI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CITY- XIV, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH C, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI