Dhruv Rathi, New Delhi V. The Dy.CIT., New Delhi

ITA 1237/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2373 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-12-2009
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B KISHORE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 1237/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 DHRUV RATHI, 24, SADHNA ENCLAVE, MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI. PAN : ADVPR1453R VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL 8(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. KISHORE, DR O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DI RECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), DATED 15 TH JANUARY, 2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004- 05. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE WHI CH HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS PLACED ON RECORD. HOWEVER, ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEARING NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AN D KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 3 8 ITD 320 (DEL) AND 2 M.P.HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKA R 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.12. 2009. [R.C. SHARMA] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 31.12.2009. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES