, , . .. . . .. . , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : SMC BENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA, J.M .) . / I.T.A. NO. 999/AHD./2011 ! '# ! '# ! '# ! '# / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-2006 M/S. KARNAVATI WOVEN SACKS INDUSTRIES BHARUCH -VS - I.T.O., WARD-4, BHARUCH (PAN : AADFK 4417C) $% / APPELLANT &'$% / RESPONDENT $% ( ) / APPELLANT BY NONE &'$% ( ) / RESPONDENT BY SHRI H.P.MEENA, SR.D.R. *!' + ( , - / DATE OF HEARING 07.09.2011 ./# ( , - / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07.09.2011 / ORDER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 04.02.2011 BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VI, BA RODA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TH ROUGH SPEED POST FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING TODAY I.E. ON 07.09.2011. HOWEVER, ON THE D ATE OF HEARING, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR WAS THE RE ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING. EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A), DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NO APPEARANCE WAS MADE. THEREFORE, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WHILE TAKING THIS VIEW, WE DERIVE SUPPORT FROM THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ES TATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. C.W.T. [223 I.T.R. 480] AND I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH I N THE CASE OF C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN 2 ITA NO. 999-AHD-2011 INDIA LTD. [38 I.T.D. 320]. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISIONS, WE DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. 0 ( ./# 1! 2 07 / 09 /2011 / 3 ( 4+ 5 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 07.09.2011. SD/- (T.K. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 07/09/2011 ( (( ( &,6 &,6 &,6 &,6 76#, 76#, 76#, 76#, / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. $% / APPELLANT 2. &'$% / RESPONDENT 3. , *; / CONCERNED CIT 4. *;- / CIT (A) 5. 6'? 4 &,!, , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 4 A B 0 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , C / D , 5 TALUKDAR/SR.P.S.