~ 1 ~ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM AND SHRI C.M.GARG , JM ITA NO: 3009 /DEL/20 13 A Y : - 2008 - 09 CEC SOMA JV VS. JCIT, RANGE 38 RACE COURSE METRO STATION NEW DELHI TUGLAK CRESCENT, TUGLAK ROAD NEW DELHI 110 011 PAN: AAAAC 4669 E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT.PARWINDER KAUR, S R.D.R. O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 22.02.2013 OF LD.CIT(A) - X X VIII, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 . 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 05.11.2014 , NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE, NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED. WE FIND FROM THE RECORD THAT ON AN EARLIER OCCASION ALSO THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADJOURNED. HENCE WE PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO T INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA P.LTD. 38 ITD, 320 (DELHI), AND THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UOI AND OTHERS IN CENTRAL EXCISE AP PEAL NO. 62/2009 JUDGEMENT DT. 17 TH SEPTEMBER,2009, WE CONSIDER IT A FIT CASE FOR DISMISSING THE APPEALS IN LIMINE, AS NOT ADMITTED. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY, IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON - APPEARANCE ~ 2 ~ AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 5 T H NOVEMBER ,2014. S D / - S D / - ( C.M. GARG ) ( J.SUDHAKAR REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED: THE 0 5 T H NOVEMBER , ,2014 *MANGA CO PY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR