Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rule 1963 applied in the absence of interest of the appellant for prosecution

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

(DELHI BENCH `E’: NEW DELHI)

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

SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.731/Del./2012

(Assessment Year: 2008-09)

Nucleus Insurance Risk Manger (P) Ltd.,

F-703, Lado Sarai,

New Delhi.

(PAN/GIR No.AABCS8225R)

(Appellant)

Vs.

 ITO, Ward 13(3),

New Delhi.

 (Respondent)

Assessee by: None.

Revenue by: Shri Aroop Kr. Singh, Sr.DR

ORDER

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

This appeal of the assessee emanates from the order passed by the CIT(A)-XVI, New Delhi, dated 27.9.2011, relevant to assessment year 2008-09.

2. Despite having noted the adjourned date on last date of hearing, assessee did not appear nor any adjournment request has been received. Thus, 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 unadmitted and dismiss the same.

4. In the 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 29.08.2012.

                                                        Sd/-                                Sd/-

                                              (B.C. MEENA)              (U.B.S. BEDI)

                                 ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: Aug. 29, 2012

SKB

Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

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

5. CIT (ITAT) Deputy Registrar, ITAT