IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : C B ENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA, J.M . & HONBLE SHRI A.N.PAHUJA, A.M.) I.T.(SS)A. NO. 135/AHD./2009 BLOCK PERIOD : 1990-1991 TO 1999-2000 & UPTO 29.10. 1999 AMISHKUMAR VASANTBHAI MANEK, SURAT -VS- A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, SURAT (PAN : ABVPM 9762F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJAY DHARIWAL, S R.D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI T.K.SHARMA, J.M . THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 12.06.2009 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II , SURAT FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 1990- 1991 TO 1999-2000 & UPTO 29.10.1999. 2. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS FIXED ON 21.07.20 11 AND THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH A/D FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 21.07.2011 IS RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK LEFT. IT I S THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO GIVE THE NEW ADDRESS. SINCE THIS WAS NOT DONE, WE HAVE NO OPTION TO PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WHILE TAKING THIS VIEW, WE DERIVE SUPPORT FROM THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. C.W.T. [223 I.T.R. 480] AND I.T.A.T., D ELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF C.I.T. VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. [38 I.T.D. 320]. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISIONS, WE DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTI ON. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 1.07.2011. SD/- SD/- (A.N.PAHUJA) (T.K. SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 21/07/2011 IT(SS)A NO.135/AHD/09 2 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE 2) THE DEPARTMENT. 3) CIT(A.) CONCERNED, 4) CIT CONCERNED, 5) D.R., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD TALUKDAR/SR.P.S.