, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI . , [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO. 624/MDS/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-2009 SHRI. BHARAT B. CHOKHANI, NO.B-12, SUPRIYA ESTATE, 3, STERLING ROAD, CHENNAI 600 034. [PAN AACPC 4203B] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD VIII (1) CHENNAI. ( !' / APPELLANT) ( #$ !' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. B. SAGADEVAN, IRS, JCIT. /DATE OF HEARING : 22-08-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-08-2017 % / O R D E R DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, I FIND THAT THE APPEA L WAS EARLIER POSTED ON 08.06.2017 AND AT THE REQUEST OF THE A.R . FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 22.08.2017 I.E. TO-DAY. THE APPEAL WAS FILED BELATEDLY, NO CONDONOTION PETITION WAS FILED. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF A SSESSEE NOR ANY ITA NO. 624/MDS/2017 :- 2 -: ADJOURNMENT REQUEST WAS RECEIVED. HENCE, IT IS INF ERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) (DEL), I DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TUESDAY, TH E 22 ND AUGUST OF 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED:22ND AUGUST, 2017 KV &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. +,- / CIT(A) 5. )./ 0 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. + / CIT 6. /12 / GF