, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL,(JM) AND RAJENDRA (AM) . . , , ./I.T.A. NO.881/M/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09) MR.OM PURI 703, 7 TH FLOOR, TRISHUL-II, SEVEN BUNGALOWS, VERSOVA, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI-400061 / VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 11(1), ROOM NO.439, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CHURCHGAE, MUMBAI-400020 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AAGPP0885 N ( ' / APPELLANT) .. ( ( ' / RESPONDENT) ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE ( ' * /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PARESH JOHRI * - / DATE OF HEARING : 6.8.2013 * - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6.8.2013 / O R D E R PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST ORDER DATED 13.12.2011 OF LD CIT(A)-III, MUMBAI. 2. ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING I.E. ON 6.8.2013, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. NOR THERE IS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURN MENT. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N.BHATTARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 460, WHEREI N, THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT . WE I.T.A. NO.881/M/2012 2 ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P)LTD., 38 ITD 320(DEL). 3. IN VIEW OF ABOVE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE PROVIS IONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIA BLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH AUG, 2013 * 1 2 6 TH AUG, 2013 * SD SD ( /RAJENDRA ) ( . . /B.R.MITTAL) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 2 DATED 6/ 08/2013 . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT 2. ( ' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 6 / CIT 5. 7 (9 , - 9 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) - 9 , /ITAT, MUMBAI