IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 96/PN/2009: A.Y. 2005-06 SHARAD RAJARAM PATIL C/O. SUSHIL EYE HOSPITAL SHREE GANESH, 25 KRISHI NAGAR COLLEGE ROAD, NASIK PAN AEWPP 0015 N APPELLANT VS. ASSTT. CIT CIR. 2, NASIK RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ABHAY DAMLE ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST CIT (A)S ORDER DATED 22-12-2008 FOR A.Y. 2005-06. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS ORIGINALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25-6- 2010. SINCE NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE, IT WAS ADJOURNED TO 27-9-2010 AND FINALLY ON 25-10-201 0. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED TO DEFEND THE CASE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 25- 10- 2010. NEITHER SOMEONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT MAY BE REASONABLY CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IN SUCH PAGE 2 OF 2 ITA NO.96/PN/2009 SHARAD RAJARAM PATIL A.Y. 2005-06 CASES, THE COURTS/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWERS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION AS HELD BY H ONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. ON THE FACT S OF THE CASE, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INT ERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. WE THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 25 TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2010. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 25 TH OCTOBER 2010 ANKAM COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A)- II, NASIK 4. THE CIT- II NASIK 5. THE D.R, A BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE