IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U. B. S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2149 /DEL/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04) MS. VARSHA BANSAL, VS. ITO, WARD 25(1), DP-80, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI PAN/GIR NO.:AAIPB3263C (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI SAMEER SHARMA, SR. DR ORDER PER U B S BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDE R PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) XXIV, NEW DELHI DATED 29.02.2012 RELEVANT T O ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NOBODY ATTENDED BUT THE ASSESSEE SENT ONE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. GROUNDS TAKEN IN THE SAID APPLICATION WERE FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE AND HENCE, THE SAME CAME TO BE REJECTED AND ALSO THE ASSESSEE DID NO APPEAR. SO, IT IS INFERRED THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THIS APPEAL. 3. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FO LLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DIFFERENT BENCHES INCLUDING THAT OF DE LHI BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. AS REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), HONBLE HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 I.T.A. NO. 5788/DEL/2012 2 ITR 480 (M.P.) AND CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND A NOTHER; 118 ITR 461, WE TREAT THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTE D AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINI. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS DISMISSED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT SOON AFTER CO NCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 17 TH DEC., 2013. SD./- SD./- (B. C. MEENA) (U.B.S.BEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 17.12.2013. SP. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-XXV, NEW DELHI AR, ITAT, 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI NEW DELHI