IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AKBER BASHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA. NO.02/HYD/2011 IN ITA NO.54/H/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 SMT. CHANDRIKA MAGANI, HYDERABAD (PAN AFKPM 2095 N) VS THE ITO WARD 6(1), HYDERABAD APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.V. PRASAD REDDY DATE OF HEARING : 23.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : ORDER PER AKBER BASHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.54/HYD/2010 REQUESTING TO SET AS IDE THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 8.11.2010. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 23.9.2011, NONE APPE ARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN SPITE OF THE NOTICE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 23.9.2011, WHEN THE APPEA L WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASS ESSEE. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS N OT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. AS HELD BY T HE HONBLE ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MU LTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED (38 ITD 320), THERE MAY BE VARIOUS RE ASONS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HE ARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT BE A DESIGN OR ABSENCE OF NEED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. BY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISI ON AND ITA NO.MA NO.2/HYD/2011 IN ITA NO.54/H/2010 SMT. CHANDRIKA MAGNANI, HYDERABAD 2 CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRES ENT CASE, WE DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IN L IMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 23.9. 2011 SD/- SD/- (G.C. GUPTA) (AKBER BASHA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED THE 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SMT. CHANDRIKA MAGANI, W/O SRI M.U. SHAKAR RAO, H NO.6-3-609/10A, FLAT NO.202, SRI SAI RESIDENCY, ANAND NAGAR COLONY, HYDERABAD 2. THE ITO, WARD 6(1), HYDERABD 3. THE CIT(A) -IV, HYDERABAD 4. THE CIT-III, HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD NP/