IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                          "A" Bench, Mumbai

                Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President
               and Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member

                   ITA No. 8284 to 8288/Mum/2010
     (Assessment Year: 2000-01, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08)

            Shri Arun G. Vartak                 ACIT, Circle 2
            Madhusmriti                   Vs.   Thane
            Tarkhad, Vasari Road
            Dist. Thane 401 201
            PAN - AAFPV 5685 F
                     Appellant                     Respondent

                   Appellant by:     None
                   Respondent by:    Shri Surinder Jit Singh

                   Date of Hearing:       22.04.2013
                   Date of Pronouncement: 22.04.2013

                                   ORDER

Per Bench

     These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders passed by the
CIT(A)-I, Thane.






2.    As can be noticed from the order sheet entries in ITA No. 8284/Mum/
2010 the assessee initially filed petition seeking stay of collection of
outstanding demand and accordingly the case also was posted for hearing
on out of turn basis but thereafter the assessee having sought adjournments
from time to time, stay granted by the Bench was vacated and the appeals
were directed to be listed for hearing in the usual course. Again the case was
posted on 11.06.2012, on which date the Bench did not function and hence
the case was listed for hearing on 09.10.2012, on which it was noticed that
the assessee was not informed of the date of hearing and accordingly the
case was adjourned to 24.12.2012. The Registry was directed to issue notice
by RPAD. On 24.12.2012 the learned D.R. filed fact sheet and the case was
adjourned to 22.04.2013 but on this date none appeared on behalf of the
assessee. From the circumstances, it is evident that the assessee is not
                                       2            ITA No. 8284 - 8288/Mum/2010
                                                                Shri Arun G. Vartak

seriously interested in pursuing the appeal. In the case of M/s. Chemipol vs.
Union of India in Central Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 the Hon'ble Bombay
High Court observed that if an assessee does not appear on the date of
hearing it can be assumed that the assessee is not serious in prosecuting
the appeal in which event there is no need for the appellate forum to dispose
of the appeal on merits. Respectfully following the aforementioned
judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court the appeals filed by the
assessee are dismissed for non-appearance on the part of the assessee of its
representative.






Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd April, 2013.

                   Sd/-                                   Sd/-
              (D. Manmohan)                          (Sanjay Arora)
              Vice President                      Accountant Member

Mumbai, Dated: 22nd April, 2013

Copy to:

   1.   The   Appellant
   2.   The   Respondent
   3.   The   CIT(A) ­ Thane-I
   4.   The   CIT­ Central, Pune
   5.   The   DR, "A" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                                                      By Order

//True Copy//
                                                   Assistant Registrar
                                           ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
n.p.