IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 339/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SUNDARAM AUTO COMPONENTS LTD., NO.29, HADDOWS ROAD, CHENNAI 600 006. [PAN:AAACS7027G] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE VI(4), CHENNAI 600 034. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI B. MURALIKUMAR, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 03 . 0 5 .201 2 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.05.2012 ORDER PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) V, CHENNAI DATED 29.11.2011 IN CIT(A)-V ITA NO. 171/2010-11 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE ON 24.02.2012 BY THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 03.05.2012 [AD ON RECORD], THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR WHEN THE APPEAL IS CALLED F OR HEARING. SO, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PRO SECUTING THE APPEAL. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.3 33 339 3939 39/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/12 1212 12 2 3. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND F OLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M ULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRA DESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON THURSDAY, THE 3 RD MAY, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 03.05.2012 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.