How many judgments cite CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee?

151 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee (10 CTR 354), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 250, Section 144, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 143(3).

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee

10 CTR 354Supreme Court of India1979#655 most cited

What is CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee authority for?

The appellant is required to effectively prosecute their appeal, and failure to appear or respond to notices can lead to the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution by the appellate authority.

151

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee · appeal dismissal for non-prosecution · failure to prosecute appeal · assessee non-appearance · section 250 Income Tax Act · section 251 Income Tax Act · effective prosecution of appeal · appellate authority powers · CIT(A) dismissal

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 250 Section 144 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 253(3)section 251(2)section 250(6)section 251(1)(a)section 246a delay in filing appeal section 253 speaking order section 251 limited scrutiny appeal before the tribunal section 25

Judgments citing CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee

Ravi Prasad Boyapati, Krishna District vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CA

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

…Memo i.e. rpboyapati@gmail.comand duly served upon him. From the above conduct of the appellant, it is evident that the appellant is no more interested in pursuing its appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT VS B. N. Bhattacharjee& Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late TukojiraoHolkarVs CWT [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) dismissed the reference filed at the instance of the assessee for default and for not taking necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the assessee in the present circumst…

Bijay Kumar Nayak, Balasore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Balasore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 73/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra & Shri Himanshu Jena, ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT, DR

Section 250

…uring the course of assessment proceedings. Even a perusal of appellate order clearly shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. 10 CTR 354 without passing a speaking order. That being so, in the interest of natural justice, the issues in this appear are restored to the file of Assessing Officer for re-adjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to produce all the documentary evidence to substantiate his case durin…

Bijay Kumar Nayak, Balasore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Balasore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 72/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra & Shri Himanshu Jena, ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT, DR

Section 250

Shashi Gupta, Madho Singh Circle vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Rajvanshi, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT- DR a

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 270ASection 57

…case, as evidently seen from the above, this appeal is liable to be dismissed in terms of the ratio of the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the various High Courts including the Hon'ble Apex Court which held in CIT v. B. N. Bhattacharjee and Another (10 CTR 354) that an appeal means an effective appeal and that to "prefer an appeal would mean effectively prosecuting an appeal. "Purposefully and constructively interpreted, preferring 4 Shashi Gupta an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it and if a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having enter…

Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 19/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT a

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…lowing decisions as under; As there is no response to appeal notices, the appeal is liable to be dismissed in terms of verdicts of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the various High Courts. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of CIT v. B.N.Bhattacharjee and another (10 CTR 354) held that an appeal means an effective appeal ; "Expression "prefers an appeal would mean effectively prosecuting an Appeal" Purposefully interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it. If a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray. The Hon'ble MP High…

Yogeshkumar Manaharlal Hajariwala, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1271/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1271/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Processing Hearing) Yogeshkumar Manaharlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ Hajariwala 3(2)(1), Surat, Room # 416, Vs. A/6, Ambiika Niketan, B/H Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Jalaram Mandir, Diva Road, Surat-395 001 Ankleshwar, Bharuch-395 004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajmpt 4689 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/03/2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69ASection 80C

…s fixing the hearing on 23.03.2021 and 11.08.2022. But there was no compliance by the appellant. Hence, the CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal based on the materials available on record. The CIT(A) relied upon the decisions of CIT vs. S. N. Banerjee & Ors, 10 CTR 354 (SC) and stated that to "prefer an appeal" would mean “effectively prosecuting an appeal”. The appellant had not been able to discharge the primary onus/burden statutorily and judicially cast upon him to substantiate the claims made in his appeal. The appellant had not been able to support his contention taken as per the grounds of appeal. The CIT…

Gunavantraya, Gulbarga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Gulbarga

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1866/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Ms. Lakshmi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Venkatesh V., D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that as there is no proper response to appeal notices, the appeal is liable to be dismissed in terms of verdicts of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee and another (10 CTR 354). Further, ld. CIT(A)/NFAC was of the view that as the assessee has failed to produce any substantial evidence to overturn the decision made by the AO in the impugned order, therefore, it has been construed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and accordingly refrained himself from discussion and decision on the grounds of…

Shyam Chelaramji Rangwani, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Nadiad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 1947/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1947/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shyam Chelaramji Rangwani The Ito 2, Vasant Vihar, बनाम / Ward-5 Nr. Zalak Hotel V/S. Nadiad - 387 002 (Gujarat) Petlad Road, Nadiad, Kheda – 387 002 (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aivpr 8944 Η प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) Assessee By: Shri Manish J. Shah & Shyri Rushin Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 18/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 14-10-2024, Which Upheld The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By The Assessing Officer, Ward-5, Nadiad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao"], For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13.

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 69A

…t respond to this notice. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, without adjudicating the grounds on merits. The CIT(A) relied on judicial precedents that permit dismissal for non-prosecution, including CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Others (1970) 10 CTR 354 (SC) and CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del), ITAT. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us with following grounds of appeal: ITA No.1947/Ahd/2024 Shyam Chelaramji Rangwani vs. The ITO Asst. Year: 2012-13 4 1. Notice issued u/s.148 dated 30.03.2019 and order passed u/s.144 r.W.S. 147 dated 12.…

Balasaheb Arjun Malawade, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Solapur

In the result, the appeal(s) of the assessee for both the AYs 2018-19

ITA 1612/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 10(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69ASection 69C

…erused the material on records. The appellate order(s) of the Ld. CIT(A) for both the AYs involved i.e. AY 2018-19 and 2020-21 reveals that he has applied the decision in CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Ors.10 CTR 354 (SC) and dismissed the appeal(s) of the assessee for want of prosecution. We further note that the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing appeal for AY 2018-19. No doubt, the Ld. CIT(A) may decide the appeal ex-parte where the assessee does not prosecute his appeal inspite of several opportunities. None-the- less, he has to adhere to the…

Balasaheb Arjun Malawade, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Solapur

In the result, the appeal(s) of the assessee for both the AYs 2018-19

ITA 1608/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 10(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69ASection 69C

Khilan N. Patel (HUF), Surat vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 429/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.429/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Khilan N. Patel (Huf), Vs. The Dcit, 6/2201, Nagarsheri, Mahidharpura, Circle – 2(3), Surat – 395003 (Gujarat) Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aakhk6987L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Akshay M. Modi, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2025

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…o the person who withholds it. Burden was on the assessee to prove that facts and findings of AO were not correct. The assessee failed to support his claim with proper evidence. The CIT(A) relied on decisions in case of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattarcharya & Another, (10 CTR 354) and various other decisions, which are at pages 10 to 11 of the appellate order and dismissed the ground that AO erred in passing the assessment order. The other two grounds with respect to addition of Rs.41,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act and treatment of Rs.32,79,845/- as business income instead of STCG were also dismissed because the assessee, even…

Shree Shanti Industries, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 545/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 545/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shree Shanti Industries Heerapur, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Abcfs3156Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…lable in the ITBA Module of the Income Tax Department, 6.4. From the above conduct of the appellant, it is evident that the appellant is not interested in pursuing its appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs B. N. Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late TukojiraoHolkar Vs CWT [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) dismissed the reference filed at the instance of the assessee for default and for not taking necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the appellant in the present procee…

M/S Shri Mangalam Traders, Mahasamund, Mahasamud vs. Income Tax Officer, Mahasamund, Mahasamud

In the result, appeal of the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 538/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.538/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Shri Mangalam Traders 1, Village-Parsada, Post- Bemcha, Tehsil: Mahasamund-493 445 (C.G.) Pan : Abdfs1546F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Mahasamund (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…lable in the ITBA Module of the Income Tax Department. 8.4. From the above conduct of the appellant, it is evident that the appellant is not interested in pursuing its appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs B. N. Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late TukojiraoHolkar Vs CWT [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) dismissed the reference filed at the instance of the assessee for default and for not taking necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the appellant in the present procee…

Liyakat Rojan Miya Ansari, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 464/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.464/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Liyakat Rojan Miya Ansari, Vs. The Ito, 252, Royal Park Society, Palod, Ward – 2(1), Mangrol, Surat - 394110 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeupl7280B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/01/2025

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 69A

…ep the matter pending before it or to pursue the matter on behalf of the complainant who had instituted the proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ITA No.464/SRT/2024/AY.2017-18 Liyakat Rojan Miya Ansari case of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Ors., (1979) 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Following the above authoritative precedents, the appeal is also liable to be dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced on 16/01/2025 in the open court. (PAWAN SINGH) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat…

Euro Jewels, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 236/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.236/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Euro Jewles, Vs. The Dcit, Plot No.258-A, Surat Special Economic Circle – 1(1)(1), Zone, Gidc Sachin, Surat - 394230 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bkipp5896G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2025

Section 10ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69C

…see on 28.01.2021, 10.07.2023, 01.08.2023, 09.08.2023 and 14.09.2023. However, neither any adjournment letter nor any written submission was filed by the appellant. The CIT(A) has relied upon the decisions in cases of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattarjee & Others, (1979) 10 CTR 354 (SC), Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, (1979) 223 ITR 480 (MP), Dr. P. Nalla Thampy vs. Shankar, (1984 (Supp) SCC 63, New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan, (2000) 3 SCC 242, CIT vs. Gold Leaf Corporation Ltd., in ITA No.798 of 2009, dated 02.09.2011 and observed that appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. There…

Lanco Rithwik Joint Venture, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 897/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena,Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., BN Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) and various other judicial precedents on the issue of non-prosecution. The learned CIT(A) accordingly sustained the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Sri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate-Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, the Assessing O…

Sureshbhai Raghubhai Thorat, Valsad vs. ITO, Ward-7, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 426/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.426/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Sureshbhai Raghubhai Thorat, Vs. The Ito, Siddharth Villa, At Post Ozar, Ward – 7, Mota Pondha B.O., Valsad – Vapi 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acapt3507F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/01/2025

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 69

…udicial or quasi-judicial body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before it or to pursue the matter on behalf of the complainant who had instituted the proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Ors., (1979) 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Following the above authoritative precedents, the appeal is also liable to be dismissed. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced on 03/01/2025 in the open court. (PAWAN SINGH) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat…

Mohd Vizzarath Ali, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1271/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1271/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mohd.Vizzarath Ali Vs. Ito, Ward-8(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Avdpa3594K] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.S.Sandhya, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Ms.P.Sunitha, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/01/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 01/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.08.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Pertaining To A.Y.2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That The Appeal Has Been Filed With A Delay Of 47 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay & Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Medical Treatment For B/L Renal Calculi & Lumbar Spondalysis & He Was Advised Complete Bedrest. The Assessee

For Appellant: Ms.S.Sandhya, ARFor Respondent: : Ms.P.Sunitha, DR

Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

…or hearing on many occasions, but no response from the assessee. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.B.N.Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) and also upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards credits in the bank account including cash deposited during the demonetization period. 7. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. We have heard the both the parties, perused the material on record and also gone through the ord…

Kcvr Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1116/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1116/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Kcvr Infra Projects Vs. Acit Private Limited Central Circle-2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaeck2457N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri R.Kumaran, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Pertaining To A.Y.2020-21. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Execution Of Civil Work Contracts, Filed The Original Return Of Income For The A.Y.2020-21 On 29.12.2020, Admitting Income Of Rs.7,01,39,640/-. The Return

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: : Shri R.Kumaran, DR

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194C

…A) without appreciating any reasons, rejected the adjournment petition filed by the assessee and dismissed appeal on technical grounds for non prosecution by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another (10 CTR 354). The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that although the Ld.CIT(A) discussed the issue on merits, but decided the issue against the assessee, without considering the written submissions filed by the assessee. Therefore, he submitted to give another opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the matter may be remanded back to the Ld.…

Suresh Kumar Reddy Krishnapuram, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1108/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1100/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Skanda Infra Projects Vs. Assistant Commissioner India Private Limited Of Income Tax Kurnool Central Circle-2(3) [Pan :Aaocs8382G] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Skanda Infra Projects Assistant Commissioner Of Kurnool Income Tax [Pan : Absfs7237C] Central Circle-2(3) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1102/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Skanda Builders Assistant Commissioner Of Kurnool Income Tax [Pan : Acvfs8921M] Central Circle-2(3) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1103-1104/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Skandhashi Developers Assistant Commissioner Of Kurnool Income Tax [Pan : Acvfs0892F] Central Circle-2(3) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Kumaran, DR

Section 132Section 143(3)

…when the case was posted for hearing on 23.08.2024, but the Ld.CIT(A) rejected the adjournment petition and disposed off the appeal filed by the assessee, by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another (10 CTR 354). The Ld.CIT(A) had also discussed the issue on merits on the basis of written submissions filed by the assessee and upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards estimation of profit from business. 4. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 4 The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri P.…