IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 753/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S LACHMAN DASS SANJAY KUMAR, V THE ITO, 62, NEW GRAIN MARKET, WARD-2, LADWA, KURUKSHETRA. KURUKSHETRA. PAN: AAAFL4825G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 01.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.04.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), KARNAL DATED 02.12.2013 FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2007-08 CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF THE PENALTY. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE DATE OF HE ARING THROUGH REGISTERED POST, HOWEVER NONE APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTAN T APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECI SION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND 2 ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 46L [RELEVANT PAGES 47 7 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G 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], WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST APRIL,2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 ST APRIL,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH