IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI, J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5166/MUM./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ) SHRI MADHUKAR B. CHOBE FLAT NO.1104, B-WING AKRUTI ATRIA SAIWADI ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 005 PAN AAEPC1300P .. APPELLANT V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-36, AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 .... RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MR. PRADEEP SHARMA DATE OF HEARING 24.8.2011 DATE OF ORDER 30.8.2011 O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23 RD MARCH 2010, PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-XXXXI, MUMBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-0 7. 2. BEFORE US, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NO NE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE ISSUED THROUGH REGIS TERED POST BY THE REGISTRY SHRI MADHUKAR B. CHOBE ITA NO.5166/M./2010 2 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED AT COL.10 OF FORM-36, WAS RETURNED UN-SERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH A REMARK UNCLAIMED . THERE IS NO APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT EITHER. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANC ES, WE COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN P ROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. 3. THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN M/S. CHEMI POL V/S UNION OF INDIA & ORS., IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.62 OF 200 9, VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 17 TH SEPTEMBER 2009, WHILE CONSIDERING THE JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT V/S S. CHENIAPPA MUDALIAR, AIR 1969 SC 1068, SUNDERLAL MANNALAL V/S NANDRAMDAS DWARKADAS, AIR 1958 MP 260, AND OTHER JUDGMENTS, OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS:- 6. WE CANNOT ALTOGETHER LOSE SIGHT OF THE RULE THAT EVERY COURT OR TRIBUNAL HAS AN INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS A PROC EEDING FOR NON- PROSECUTION WHEN THE PETITION / APPELLANT BEFORE IT DOES NOT WISH TO PROSECUTE THE PROCEEDINGS. IN SUCH A SITUATION, UNL ESS THE STATUTE CLEARLY REQUIRES THE COURT OR TRIBUNAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL / PROCEEDING AND DECIDE IT ON MERITS, IT CAN DISMISS THE APPEAL / PROCEEDING FOR. THE DELHI BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN M/S. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), HAS HELD THAT IN A SIMILAR CIRCU MSTANCES, THE APPEAL MAY BE DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 4. APPLYING THE AFORESAID PROPOSITIONS LAID DOWN BY TH E HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE DECISION O F THE TRIBUNAL CITED SUPRA, WE TREAT THESE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND HOLD THE SA ME AS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.8.2011 SD/- VIJAY PAL RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 30 TH AUGUST 2011 SHRI MADHUKAR B. CHOBE ITA NO.5166/M./2010 3 COPY TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE RESPONDENT; (3) THE CIT(A), MUMBAI, CONCERNED; (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 24.8.2011 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 26.8.2011 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 26.8.2011 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 26.8.2011 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 26.8.2011 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.8.2011 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 30.8.2011 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER