IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES J, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. D.K. AGARWAL (J.M.) AND SHRI. RAJENDRA SINGH (A.M.) ITA NO.5224/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-2003 ITA NO.5225/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-2004 ITA NO.5226/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-2005 ITA NO.5227/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-2006 RAFIQUE MOHAMAD PATEL H.NO.18, IQBAL MANZIL, 5 TH NIZAMPURA, BHIWANDI, THANE PAN : ANDPP5002F VS. ITO 1(3) KALYAN. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI NONE. (AR) RESPONDENT BY : MRS. KUSUM INGALE (CIT DR) O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH, A.M. THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS ALL DATED 15.03.2010 OF LEARNED CIT (A)- I, THANE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2006-07. SINCE ALL THESE APPEALS INVOLVE IDENTICAL DISPUTE WHICH RELATES TO LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1) (C) OF THE I.T. ACT., THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY A SINGLE CONSOLIDATE D ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.2357/MUM/2009 A.Y.: 2003-2004 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF ALL THESE APPEALS, NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESEE. HOWEVER, A LETTER DATED 20.0 8.2011 HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THESE APPEALS AND ACCORDING LY IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE APPEALS MAY BE TREATED AS WITHDR AWN. THE LD DR APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE HAD NO OBJECTION IN THE M ATTER. WE THEREFORE, DISMISS ALL THESE APPEALS AS WITHDRAWN. 3. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011. SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SD/- (RAJENDRA SINGH) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 30.08.2011 JANHAVI COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- XIV, MUMB AI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CITY- XIV, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH C, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI