How many judgments cite CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another?

1,656 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another (118 ITR 461), spanning 2012 to 2026.

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

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

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another

118 ITR 461Supreme Court of India1997#19 most cited

What is CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another authority for?

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

1,656

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya · 118 ITR 461 · appeal · pursuing appeal · effectively pursuing appeal · filing appeal · assistance from assessee · opportunity of being heard · section 250 · section 250(6)

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

section 250(6)speaking order section 25 opportunity of being heard section 250 condonation of delay section 69a appeal before the tribunal section 142(1)section 144 section 148 section 147

Judgments citing CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another

Viola Singh, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Raipur

ITA 366/RPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No:366/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250

…ous opportunities were provided to the appellant Who deliberately and Willfully avoided the compliance of statutory notices which simply prove that he is not interested in prosecution of the matter. It is held in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Ors. (118 ITR 461) by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursing it. The sum and substance of ratio of this case is that the assessee cannot ask for relief merely by filing an appeal. In the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) (MP) while dismissing the reference at the instance…

Shree Nirmal Gyan Pratishthan, Pune vs. The CIT (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 2760/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 250

…he assessee. In the absence of any response to the said notices, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee appears to be not interested in pursuing this appeal. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and another 118 ITR 461 (SC), the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution by observing in para 4.4 and 4.5 of the appellate order as under : 5. “4.4 It is pertinent to add here that laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. It means equity comes to the aid of the vigilant and not the slumbering. In all acti…

Pimprad Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Seva Society, Satara vs. ACIT Circle Satara, Satara

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

ITA 19/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69ASection 80P(2)(a)

…IT(A) / NFAC, there was non-compliance from the side of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in the ex-parte order passed by him, dismissed the appeal by following the decision 3 SA No.1/PUN/2025 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattachargee 118 ITR 461 (SC) and various other decisions. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that both the orders of lower authorities are ex-parte orders. She submitted that the asse…

Baneesh, Malappuram vs. ITO, Ward 2, Tirur

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

ITA 863/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Baneesh .......... Appellant Kolagarayil, Ayilakkad Polpakara, Malappuram 679576 [Pan: Aaspe8854C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 2, Tirur Appellant By: Shri Shivadas Chettoor, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.01.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 03.08.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Filed His Return Of Income For Ay 2020-21 On 16.03.2021 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 11,00,030/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2

For Appellant: Shri Shivadas Chettoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM Assessment Year: 2020-21 Baneesh .......... Appellant Kolagarayil, Ayilakkad Polpakara, Malappuram 679576 [PAN: AASPE8854C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 2, Tirur Appellant by: Shri Shivadas Chettoor, CA Respondent by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 29.01.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 03.08…

The Pazhambalacode Service Co-Operative Bank Limited No P 492, Palakkad vs. ITO, Ward 5, Palakkad

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

ITA 347/COCH/2024[A.Y 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Pazhambalacode Service .......... Appellant Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Pazhambalacode P.O. Alathur Taluk, Palakkad 678544 [Pan: Aaaap4158K] Vs. The Income Tax Officer - 5 .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, English Chruch Road Palakkad 670014

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 80P

…iety is a co-operative bank. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal exparte for non prosecution placing on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharji and Anr 118 ITR 461 (SC) and few other judgements. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. It is the settled position of law that…

Mukesh Kumar Mittal, Surajpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambikapur

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

ITA 4/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.04/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mukesh Kumar Mittal Bhaiyathan Road, Post-Surajpur (C.G)-497 229 Pan: Amlpm8514A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.04/RPR/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mukesh Kumar Mittal Bhaiyathan Road, Post-Surajpur (C.G)-497 229 PAN: AMLPM8514A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ravi Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronouncemen…

Sarita Konda, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai

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

ITA 2/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.02/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sarita Konda Camelia Flat No.15, Block A01, 4Th Floor, Greenville City, Boriyakala, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aukps1814J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(v)

…appeal and no material/argument has been brought on record by the appellant against the order of the AO and in support of the grounds taken in appeal. 4.1 Reference is made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC), in which the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the issue of prosecution of appeal has stated that: "Preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it". 4.2 The Delhi Tribunal in CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) when faced with a similar situation of non-prosecution of…

Nainu Bhadu, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1, Bardoli

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

ITA 1129/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1129/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Nainu Bhadu, Vs. The Ito, Plot No.1, Laxminarayan Society, Ward – 1, Kadodara, Tal – Palsana, Surat - 394327 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Avqpn6835M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2025

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

…on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd., in ITA No.798 of 2009, dated 02.09.2011, (ii) M/s Chemipol vs. UoI, Central Appeal No.62 of 2009, (iii) Tukojirao Holkar vs. CIT, 223 ITR 480 (MP HC), (iv) CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharya, 118 ITR 461 (SC), (v) Whirpool India Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No.2006/Del/2011, dated 19.12.2011 and (vi) Abhay P. Kalbhor vs. DCIT, ITA No.1469/Pun/2002 and held that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal and the same deserves to be dismissed. On merit, the CIT(A) observed that since the appellant did not make any cogent explanation regarding the sour…

Nikunjkumar Ghanshyambhai Desai, Desai Street vs. Income Tax Officer, Second Floor

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

ITA 176/SRT/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Nikunjkumar Ghanshyambhai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Panetha Desai Street Paneth, Zaghadia, Ward – 1(4), Bharuch – 393120, Gujarat Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amgpd2814B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Piyush Panchal, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2025

Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

…023, but the assessee failed to comply with the notices. Therefore, the CIT(A) has decided the appeal on the basis of the materials available on record including the assessment order. The CIT(A) relied upon the decision of CIT vs. B. N. Banerjee & Ors, (1977) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and stated that “preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it.” The CIT(A) also relied upon the decision of ITAT, Delhi in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and held that the law assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. The CIT(A) observed that…

Kuthanur Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Palakkad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Palakkad

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

ITA 677/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kuthanur Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kuthanur P.O., Palakkad 678721 [Pan: Aaaak1516G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, English Church Road Palakkad 678001

For Appellant: Ms. Dhanya G., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kuthanur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kuthanur P.O., Palakkad 678721 [PAN: AAAAK1516G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, English Church Road Palakkad 678001 Appellant by: Ms. Dhanya G., CA Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21.01.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax…

Edakkad Block Agricultural Improvement Co-Operative Society Limited, Kannur vs. ITO, Ward 1 and Tps, Kannur

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

ITA 668/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Edakkad Block Agricultural .......... Appellant Imporvement Co-Op. Society Ltd. Valiyannur, Varam, Kannur 670594 [Pan: Aaaae6967B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward 1 & Tps Aayakar Bhavan, Chovva P.O. Kannur 670006 Appellant By: Shri Jaikrishna, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Jaikrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM Assessment Year: 2017-18 Edakkad Block Agricultural .......... Appellant Imporvement Co-op. Society Ltd. Valiyannur, Varam, Kannur 670594 [PAN: AAAAE6967B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward 1 and TPS Aayakar Bhavan, Chovva P.O. Kannur 670006 Appellant by: Shri Jaikrishna, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21.01.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the orde…

Premalatha Korottoliprasantham, Calicut vs. Income Tax Officer, Wrd 1(2), Kozhikode

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

ITA 662/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Premalatha Korottoliprasantham .......... Appellant 1 Prasantham, Korotholi Puthiyangadi P.O. Calicut 673021 [Pan: Ancpk7154N] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 1(2), Kozhikode Appellant By: Ms. Jinu, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 08.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.01.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Jinu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250(6)

…the total turnover. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal exparte for non prosecution placing on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee [1977] 118 ITR 461 (SC). 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order.…

Ram Babu Jhalani, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur

ITA 1218/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Him. 2.1 At The Outset Of Hearing, The Bench Observed That There Is Delay Of 151 Days In Filing Of The Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Filed Application For Seeking Condonation Of Delay, With Following Prayers & The Assessee To This Effect Also Filed An Affidavit Also :-

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Khandelwal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT (Th. V.C.)

Section 147Section 250

…aryana High Court in the case of New Dewan Oil Mills Vs. CIT reported in (2008) 2961TR495 (P&H) had returned the reference unanswered, since the assessee remained absent and there was no assistance from the assessee. In the case of CIT vs B. N. Bhattacharya. (118 ITR 461) (Pages 477, 478), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "appeal does not mean, the mere filing of the memo of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same". The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd on 02.09.2011 in ITA No. 798 of 2009 held that a negligent appellant should not be given many opportunities…

Mustafa Katthawala, Kota vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 1156/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 244ASection 45(3)

…t the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he failed to do. In this context, useful reference may also be made to Hon'ble Apex Court's decisions in the cases of CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC) and CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee 118 ITR 461 (SC) for the proposition that an assessee having once filed an appeal, cannot withdraw it and even if the assessee refuses to appear at the hearing, the first appellate authority can proceed with the enquiry and if he finds that there has been an underassessment, he can enhance the assessment. Just as, once the assessment proceedings are set in m…

Ranchi Fuels, Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara

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

ITA 532/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.532/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ranchi Fuels Limtara, Nandghat, Baloda Bazar-492 006 (C.G.) Pan: Aatfr0836L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.532/RPR/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ranchi Fuels Limtara, Nandghat, Baloda Bazar-492 006 (C.G.) PAN: AATFR0836L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CA Revenue by : Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 06.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronouncement : 08…

Vijayant Khedulkar, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raigarh

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

ITA 531/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.531/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vijaykant Khedulkar Q. No.3, Ananthalaya Colony, Handi Chowk, Raigarh (C.G.)-496 001 Pan : Bbupk5167Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raigarh (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

…a High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT(2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another(118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) has held that the appeal does not mean mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. However, the Income Tax Act requires the CIT(Appeal) to apply mind and decide on merit all the issues which arise from the impugned order whether or not the same has been pursued by the appellant. 4. The assessing officer h…

Indo Lahri Bio Power Ltd, Raipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 529/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.529/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Indo Lahri Bio Power Limited 38, Saheed Smarak Complex, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaaci9125K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…yana High Court in the case of New Dewan Oil Mills Vs. CIT reported in (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) had returned the reference unanswered, since the assessee remained absent and there was no assistance from the assessee. In the case of CIT vs B. N. Bhattacharya. (118 ITR 461) (Pages 477, 478), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "appeal does not mean, the mere filing of the memo of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same". The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of C1T vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd on 02.09.2011 in ITA No.798 of 2009 held that a negligent appellant should not be given many opportunities…

Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Patna vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Patna

In the result, both the appeals preferred by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: the Assessing Officer to the notices issued by him. It is seen that even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not make any worthwhile presentation except that written submissions were filed in which it was mentioned that compliance could not be made before the Ld. Assessing Officer because a number of staff were suffering from COVID and hence were not alert enough to make proper representation before the Revenue Authorities. However, going by the fact that even before the Ld. CIT(A) ther

Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 271

…lias Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao Patil and Ors. reported in (2002) 253 ITR 798, Ishwarlalmali Rahod vs Gopal & Ors in SLP (Civil) 14117-14118 of 2021 vide order dated 20/09/2021 and B.N. Bhattacharjee and Anr. vs. CIT reported in (1979) 118 ITR 461 and the maxim for holding that the appellant is not diligent and careful in pursuing the appellate proceedings. 5. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 12.26 crores on account of interest on funds from Govt. of Bihar. 2 I.T.A. Nos. 362 & 363/Pat/2023 Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited 6.…

Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Patna vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Patna

In the result, both the appeals preferred by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 271

Sawita Shah, Purnia vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Purnia

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

ITA 605/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrasawita Shah, Income Tax Officer, W/O Kamal Kishor Gupta Sudi Ward 3(1), Purnia Tola, Ansari Thakur Tola, Vs Dalmapur, Baisi, Purnia, Bihar - 854315 (Pan: Gnzps0882J) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68

…did not oppose the request of the assessee. 5. We have considered the submissions of the assessee. The Ld. Addl./Joint CIT(A) has confirmed the addition after discussing the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the decisions in CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharya 118 ITR 461, M/s. Chemipol V/s. Union of India [Central Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009], Nandramdas Dwarkadas, AIR 1958 MP 260 (Bombay), Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Vs. Shankar 1984(Supp) SCC 63 and New India Assurance Vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, Whirlpool of India Ltd. V DCIT (ITA No. 2006/Del/2011 dated. 19/12/2001 of the ITAT, Delhi Bench), Chadha Finlease Ltd…