IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT ME MBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.457 & 458 /MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S.BEST & CROMPTON ENGG.LTD. 28, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AMBATTUR, CHENNAI-600 098. PAN:AAACB2753N . VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY RANGE I(2), CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S .MOHARANA, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 7 TH MAY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 TH MAY, 2012 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-III , CHENNAI DATED 26.12.2011 & 12.01.2012 RELEVANT TO THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS 2007-08 & 2008-09 RESPECTIVELY. 2. THE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING TO-DAY I.E. 07.05.2012, REGARDING WHICH NOTICES OF HEARING WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED AD AND THE SAME WERE DUL Y RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE POS TAL ITA NO. 457 & 458/MDS/2012 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD PLACED ON RECORD. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICES, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE APPEARED O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS R ECEIVED. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. HENCE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN I NDIA P. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON 'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FOR W ANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON MONDAY, THE 7 TH OF MAY, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P.GEORGE) (VIKAS AWASTHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH MAY, 2012. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.