IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 2106/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 BONANZA ENTERPRISES, C/O M/S SHRAWAN KUMAR & ASSOCIATES, 186/1, SAKET, OPP. AGARWAL DHARAMSHALA, ROORKEE. PAN : AAHFB1895M VS. ITO, WARD-01, ROORKEE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH KUMAR KEDIA, SR. DR O R D E R PER U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDE R PASSED BY LD. CIT (A)-II, DEHRADUN, DATED 06.02.2012 RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2008-09. 2. DESPITE SENDING NOTICE OF HEARING THROUGH REGIST ERED POST SUFFICIENTLY IN ADVANCE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE FIXED WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING. ON EARLIER OCCASION ALS O DEFICIENCY IN TRIBUNAL FEE WAS POINTED OUT IN THE DEFICIENCY LETTER ISSUED ALONG WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING. NEITHER DEFICIENCY WAS REMOVED NOR THE AS SESSEE ATTENDED. IT IS, 2 THUS, INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THIS APPEAL. 3. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FO LLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CIT VS. MULT IPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE M.P.H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR, 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE T REAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 4. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF HE ARING ON 20 TH NOVEMBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- [B.C. MEENA] [U.B.S. BEDI] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 20.11.2012. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES