, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G GG G BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI , . , . , !' !' !' !' #$ #$ #$ #$ BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & & & & SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO D. KARUNAKARA RAO D. KARUNAKARA RAO D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM , AM , AM , AM ./ I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. 8299 8299 8299 8299/MUM/201 /MUM/201 /MUM/201 /MUM/2010 00 0 ( %& %& %& %& ' ' ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2005-06) ./ I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. 8300/MUM/2010 8300/MUM/2010 8300/MUM/2010 8300/MUM/2010 ( %& %& %& %& ' ' ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2004-05) ./ I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. I.T.A. NO. 8301/MUM/2010 8301/MUM/2010 8301/MUM/2010 8301/MUM/2010 ( %& %& %& %& ' ' ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2003-04) M/S WEB CITY TRADING COMPANY PVT. LTD., A/503- 504, NEW D. S. NAGAR, NEW BUILDING NO. 1, NARSING LANE, OPP. N. L. SCHOOL, MALAD (W) MUMBAI-400064 & & & & / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER- 7(3)(4) MUMBAI $( !' ./ ) ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACW4999H ( (* / APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT) .. ( +,(* / RESPONDENT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT) $ $ $ $ - . ! - . ! - . ! - . ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI VIRENDRA OJHA %& %&%& %& /0 /0 /0 /0 - . ! - . ! - . ! - . ! /ASSESSEE BY : NONE & & & & - -- - 0' 0' 0' 0' / DATE OF HEARING : 30 TH OCTOBER 2013 12' 12' 12' 12' - -- -0' 0' 0' 0' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30 TH OCTOBER 2013 #!3 / O R D E R PER : , . . / VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THESE THREE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.7.2010 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEA LS) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2005-06. 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THESE APPEALS WERE CALLED FOR HEARING AS ON TODAY I.E. 30.10.2013 DESPITE THE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE VIDE ACKN OWLEDGMENT ON ITA NO. 8299, 8300 & 8301/M/2010 WEB CITY TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. 2 RECORD. THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE SH OWS THAT HE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL FILED BY I T. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS NOT ADMITTED BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF E STATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT(223 ITR 480(MP) AND BY THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PV T LTD (38 ITD 320 (DEL). 3 HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATI ON CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEA RING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY AT ITS DISCRETION RECALL THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013 SD/- SD/- ( . ) !' #$ (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) % #$ (VIJAY PAL RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 30 TH OCTOBER 2013 SUBODH COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI