Smt. Sudesh Rani, Smt. Sudesh Rani, Proprietor, Proprietor, M/s Amba Marble Industries, M/s Amba Marble Industries, D----16, Industrial Estate, 6, Industrial Estate, 6, Industrial Estate, Vs.. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Ward----2,,,, Roorkee. Roorkee.
October, 16th 2013
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
`G' : NEW DELHI
DELHI BENCH `G
G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND
BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL,
I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Assessment Year : 2007-
Smt. Sudesh Rani, Vs. Income Tax Officer,
M/s Amba Marble Industries, Roorkee.
D-16, Industrial Estate,
PAN : ADJPK2887M.
Appellant by : None.
Respondent by : Ms. Y.S.Kakkar, Sr.DR.
G.D.AGRAWAL, VP :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of
learned CIT(A)-II, Dehradun dated 2nd November, 2011 for the AY 2007-
2. At the time of hearing before us today i.e. 7th October, 2013,
neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor there was any
request for adjournment. The notice of hearing has duly been served
upon the assessee and the A.D. card is placed on record. Earlier also
on two occasions, i.e. on 17.09.2012 and 12.02.2013, the hearing was
adjourned at the request of the assessee.
3. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is
not interested in prosecuting this appeal. While taking this view, we
derive support from the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of
CIT vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd.  38 ITD 320 (Delhi).
Accordingly, we dismiss the assessee's appeal in limine.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in
Decision pronounced in the open Court on conclusion of hearing
on 7th October, 2013.
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Dated : 07.10.2013
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Smt. Sudesh Rani,
Proprietor, M/s Amba Marble Industries,
D-16, Industrial Estate, Roorkee.
2. Respondent : Income Tax Officer,
5. DR, ITAT