IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 454/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S BHARTI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., G-2, 2 ND FLOOR, SOUTH EX.II, NEW DELHI 110 049. PAN : AAACB9995L VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 9, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MS Y.S. KAKKAR, SR. DR O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DI RECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), DATED 10 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22 ND NOVEMBER, 2011. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVE R, ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEARING NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT BEFORE CIT (A) ALSO NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND HE HAS ALSO PASSED EX PARTE ORDER. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SI TUATION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROS ECUTING ITS APPEAL. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PRO VISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNA L IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN 2 (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND M.P.HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.11. 2011. SD/- SD/- [A.N. PAHUJA] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 22.11.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES