IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH `A : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1643/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) BALDEV BRAR, VS. ITO, WARD 22(4), C-60B, 22 ND FLOOR, NEW DELHI KALKAJI, NEW DELHI. (PAN/GIR NO.AYGPK0656E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJAY PANDEY, SR.DR ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-VIII, NEW DELHI, DATED 01.11.2011, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FOUND TO BE DEFECTIVE INASMUCH AS THE APPEAL WAS FILED LATE BY 80 DAYS FOR WHICH DEFECTS MEMO STAND ISSUED ALONG WITH NOTICE OF HEARING WHICH WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE SUFFICIENTLY IN ADVANCE. NEITHER, THE DEFECTS POINTED IN THE DEFECT MEMO HAVE BEEN REMOVED, NOR ASSESSEE HAS PUT IN HIS APPE ARANCE OR SENT AN ADJOURNMENT REQUEST IN THIS REGARD. 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 I.T.A. NO.1643/DEL./2012 (A.Y. : 2005-06) 2 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. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT SOON AFTER THE CONCL USION OF THE HEARING ON 11.06.2012. SD/- SD/- (A.N. PAHUJA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : JUNE 11, 2012 SKB COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-VIII, NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT) DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT