Rule 19(2) apply in the absence of prosecution

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

(DELHI BENCH `C’: NEW DELHI)

BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.1028/Del./2012

(Assessment Year: 2008-09)

M/s IFC Overseas,

B-11, 2nd Floor, Gujaranwala Town,

New Delhi-110009.

(PAN/GIR No.AAAFI7160H)

(Appellant)

Vs.

ACIT, Circle 20(1),

New Delhi.

 (Respondent)

Assessee by: None

Revenue by: Shri Aroop Singh, Sr.DR

ORDER

PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M.

This appeal of the assessee emanates from the order of the CIT (A)-XXII, New Delhi, dated 9.12.2011, relevant to assessment year 2008-09.

2. Despite getting the case adjourned by the Counsel of the assessee on 16.10.2012, nobody attended nor any request for adjournment has been received. So, 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. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 I.T.R. 480 (MP), we treat the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted and dismiss the same

.

4. As a result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Order pronounced in open court soon after the conclusion of the hearing on 16.10.2012.

Sd/- Sd/-

(J.S. REDDY) (U.B.S. BEDI)

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: Oct. 16, 2012

SKB

Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

4. CIT (A)-XXII, New Delhi.

5. CIT (ITAT) Deputy Registrar, ITAT