IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.833/HYD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION, RAMKOTE, OPP. JAGRUTHI COLLEGE, HYDERABAD. PAN:A AAJC2508H VS DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTINS), HYDERABAD. {APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT.VIDISHA KALRA (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 17-12-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17-12-2012. ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21-2-2012 PASSED BY THE DIR ECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD PERTAINING TO TH E ASST. YEAR 20011-12. 2. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING TO-DAY I.E. ON 17-12- 2012. THIS DATE OF HEARING WAS NOTED BY THE ASSESS EES COUNSEL ON EARLIER OCCASION OF HEARING I.E. ON 3-9- 2012. IN SPITE OF THIS, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS N OT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. AS HELD BY T HE HONBLE ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MU LTIPLAN ITA 833 OF 2012 CO-OP. DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION 2 INDIA LIMITED (38 ITD 320), THERE MAY BE VARIOUS RE ASONS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HE ARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT BE A DESIGN OR ABSENCE OF NEED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. BY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISI ON AND CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRES ENT CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17-12-201 2. SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL M EMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 17 TH DECEMBER, 2012. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. C/O G.S. MADHAVA RAO & CO., CAS, H.NO.11-26-53, M.G. ROAD, WARANGAL. 2. DIT (E), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD JMR* ITA 833 OF 2012 CO-OP. DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION 3