IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 544/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SHRI NOOR MOHD., VS THE ITO, S/O SHRI MOHD. ISMAIL, WARD IV(4), B-111-524, QILA REHMATGARH, MALERKOTLA. MALERKOTLA. PAN: ABRPM5937A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 29.05.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.05.2017 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2, LUDHIANA DATED 15.02.2 016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE T IME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL DESPITE NOTIFYING THE DATE OF HEARING THROUGH REGISTERED POST. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THA T ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND TH E APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN MY ABOVE VIEW, I GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECISI ON OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 46L [RELEVANT PAGES 47 7 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: 2 THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. MY VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS ALSO: I) CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD: 38 ITD 320 (DE L) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT: 223 ITR 480(MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS [SUPRA], I DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 29 TH MAY,2017. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH