IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH `D : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1637/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) MRS. JYOTI BANSAL, VS. CIT(A)-XXIV, A-2/121, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI.110 058. (PAN/GIR NO.AAWP5456H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SHUMANA SEN, SR.DR ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-XXIV, NEW DELHI, DATED 23.01.2012, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2008-09. 2. A DEFECT NOTICE TICKING SERIAL NOS.4,5 & 16 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE TO RECTIFY THE SAME WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE RECE IPT, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND. EVEN SENDING NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 25.09.2012, SUFF ICIENTLY IN ADVANCE, ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. THUS, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES, 1963 AND FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M ULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE MADHYA P RADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 I.T.R. 480 (MP), WE TREAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME. I.T.A. NO.1637/DEL./2012 (A.Y. : 2008-09) 2 4. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT SOON AFTER THE CONC LUSION OF THE HEARING ON 25.09.2012. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : SEPT. 25, 2012 SKB COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-XXIV, NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT) DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT