IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 262/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) MICRO AGE INSTRUMENTS P. LTD., D-1, P.NO.18/2, CHINCHWAD, PUNE. .. APPELLANT PAN: AABCM1787E VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-9, PUNE. .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AJIT KORDE DATE OF HEARING : 13.05.2013 DATE OF ORDER : 27.05.2013 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V, PUNE, DATED 07.12.2011. 2. IN THIS CASE, HEARING WAS FIXED ON 13.05.2013. HOWEVER, NEITHER ASSESSEE ATTENDED NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEA L. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BH ATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FI LING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION, A S HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHE MIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE COURTS AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WAN T OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF MAY, 2013. SD/- SD/- (R.K.PANDA) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 27 TH MAY, 2013 GSPS COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE 2) THE DCIT, CIRCLE-9, PUNE. 3) THE CIT(A)-V, PUNE. 4) THE CIT-V, PUNE. 5) THE DR, A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE. 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// PRIVATE SECRETARY, I.T.A.T., PUNE