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. 986/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SHRI NAVPREET SINGTH BHASIN, V THE JCIT (TDS), SCO 59, SECTOR 47-C, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: APTPS4387N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 18.02.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.02.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), CHANDIGARH DATED 03.07.2013 FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE RECORD REVEALED THAT THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNE D TIME TO TIME ON THE REQUEST OF COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. ON TH E DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DE SPITE NOTIFYING THE FURTHER DATE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESS EE. IT APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIA BLE 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 18 TH FEBRUARY,2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH