IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES SMC : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.2985/DEL./2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013 SHREE SAMEER C-30, ALLIANZ COLONY, RUDRAPUR (US NAGAR) PAN BQNPS9740R VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), RUDRAPUR. ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : - NONE - FOR REVENUE : SHRI T. VASANTHAN, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 07.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.09.2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), HALDWANI, DATED 13.02.2017 , FOR THE A.Y. 2012-2013. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED THE DATE OF HEARI NG THROUGH REGISTERED POST. HOWEVER, THE SAME IS RETUR NED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS LEFT WITHOUT I NFORMATION. NO OTHER ADDRESS HAVE BEEN GIVEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVICE OF 2 ITA.NO.2985/DEL./2017 SHRI SAMEER, RUDRAPUR, U.S. NAGAR NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS ASSE SSEE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND FOLLOWING V ARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING THAT OF MU LTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL.); HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COUR T DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), AND ALSO THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN T HE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477 -478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME, T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI, DATED 07 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017 VBP/- 3 ITA.NO.2985/DEL./2017 SHRI SAMEER, RUDRAPUR, U.S. NAGAR COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R. ITAT SMC BENCH, DELHI 6. GUARD FILE. // BY ORDER // ASST. REGISTRAR : ITAT DELHI BENCHES : DELHI.