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

Yudhishthir Dilip Khatau, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1887/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

Section 69A

…response or submission before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) when the appeal was fixed for hearing.” 4.1 We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has mainly dismissed the appeal in-limine following the decision in the case of CIT V. Β.Ν. Bhattacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 and other decisions without deciding the issue in dispute on merit. Under the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to pass an order on merit even in case of non-compliance on the part of the assessee. Yudhishthir Dilip Khatau 4 ITA No. 1887/MUM/2024 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has justified the reaso…

Premila Mukeshbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1049/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 16Th October, 2023 Passed By 2

For Appellant: Shri Parin S. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 68Section 69A

…more to submit except for raising the ground. 4.1 The Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No. 1025-1027/Chandi/2005 for the A.Y. 2002-03 in the case of M/s Chhabra Land and Housing Ltd. after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B. N. Bhattachargee, 118 ITR 461 (SC) held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it. Keeping in view of the aforesaid factual position, the appeal filed by the appellant is, therefore, decided on merits. 5. In the instance of the case the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings has not challenged the contention of the AO…

Digamber Jain Mandir Shri Neminath Ji Sanwala Ji Amer, Jaipur vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 337/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

…rtal as noted above. However, it is a matter of record that any kind of documents or details were not submitted by the Authorized Representative of the appellant. 4.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.Ν. Bhattacharjee and another (118 ITR 461) (at pages 477 & 478) that appeal does not mean filing of memo of appeal but also pursing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol Vs. Union of India in Ex…

Digamber Jain Mandir Shri Neminath Ji Sanwalaji Amer, Jaipur vs. ITO (Exemption) Ward-1, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 336/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

Digamber Jain Mandir Shri Neminath Ji Sanwalaji Amer, Jaipur vs. ITO (Exemption) Ward-1, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 335/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

Digamber Jain Mandir Shri Neminath Ji Sanwalaji Amer, Jaipur vs. ITO (Exemption) Ward-1, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 334/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

Smt. Bugli Devi, Tehsil Amer, Jhotwara, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 278/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT) (Th. V.C.)

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ufficient time and opportunities and accordingly, is not maintainable. The relevant citations are briefed as under for placing reliance to adduce appellant's non-prosecution of appeal as not maintainable. 1. In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee& Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that "the appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it. 2. In the case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkerVs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order. "if the p…

Nrw Kuldeep Singh, Sukhvider Singh & Others, Kanpur vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Kanpur

ITA 76/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 076/Lkw/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 New Kuldeep Singh Sukhvinder Singh & Ors 111A/29B, Rk Nagar, Kanpur. Up-208 012 Pan: Aadan2365F . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Samrat Chandra [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)

…nt its case before the Ld. NFAC. When assessee failed to represent his case on merits with cogent evidences the Ld. NFAC dismiss the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without adjudicating the merits by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs B. N. Bhattacharjee’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)], ‘Estate of Late Tukojiro Holkar Vs CWT’ [1997, 223 ITR 480 (MP)] and ‘CIT Vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320]. 6. We are heedful to the restriction placed by clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 251 of the Act which obligates the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue either by confirming or annulling the addition or reducing…

Sher Singh, Palampur vs. Income Tax Officer, Palampur

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

ITA 664/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 272A(1)(d)

…not discharged his duty. 7.1 It is the duty of the appellant to furnish corroborative evidence / document to substantiate its grounds of appeal which the appellant failed to do. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya (118 ITR 461) that "preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it". 7.2 In the case of Sanjay Kapoor vs. ACIT (2022) 138 taxmann.com 207 (SC), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that "... The petitioner herein had admittedly deposited Rs. 11,40,000/- in cash in his bank account. Though the said entry is reflected in the Re…

P.Srinivasan, Salem vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Hosur

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

ITA 870/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 870/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Ponnusamy Srinivasan, The Income Tax Officer, No.51/19, Venugopalasamy Street, Vs. Ward 1(1), Hosur – 635 109. Hosur. Pan: Gcyps 1607B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T.S. Subramaniam, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1060347000 (1) Dated 30.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Hosur For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 29.12.2019. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Ar For The Assessee Stated That The Order Of Cit(A) Is Ex-Parte & There Is No Adjudication By Cit(A)-Nfac On Merits Of The Case. It Was Stated By Ld.Ar That Even On Jurisdictional Ground On New Issue Of 143(2) Of The Act, The Cit(A)-Nfac Has Not Properly Adjudicated The Issue. On Merits, The Issue Is Addition Made By The Ao Of Unexplained Cash Deposit Added U/S.69A Of The Act & Taxed U/S.115Bbe Of The Act Amounting To Rs.31,13,500/- & Assessing ‘Income From Other Sources’ At Rs.22,97,140/-. The Ld.Ar Stated That The Cit(A)-Nfac Has Given His Adjudication As Under:- 6. Ground No. 6: This Ground Pertains To Legality Of Assessment U/S 144 Without Issuance Of Notice U/S 143(2).

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Subramaniam, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

…e appeal as 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. 9. 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 persuasion of appeal has stated that- "Preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it.” 10. In view of these facts. I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in the AO's order and therefore, the grounds of appeal are dismissed.…

Suva Lal Paharia, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Jaipur

ITA 157/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 144Section 147Section 5

…issued, even adjournment was not sought. In such situation, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. 5.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) that appeal does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mis Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal…

Idrish, Matawas vs. ITO, Ward-Bhiwadi, Income Tax

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

ITA 818/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma (Adv.) (Th.V.C.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra(Addl.CIT)

Section 147Section 2(14)Section 234A

…New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT ((2008) 296 ITR 495] returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was no assistance from the assessee. 1. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattacharjee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. In the judgment, their Lordships averred as follows: “………..This turns on the meaning of the words "preferred an appeal". "Preferred" is a word of dual import. Its semantics depend on the scheme and the context; its import must hel…

Sanjay Kumar Singh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 453/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Ray, Advocate, Shri S. N. Patra & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

…er sources, a sum of Rs.1,46,23,369/- was also added u/s. 56(2)(x)(b) of the Act. Before the Ld. CIT(A) no compliance was made despite repeated opportunities being provided and the Ld. CIT(A) relying upon the decision in the case of B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC), Estate of Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) and CIT Vs. Multiplan India P. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as unadmitted. Further, there was delay in filing the appeal and since in view of the Ld. CIT(A) the delay was not bona fide and no sufficient cause was shown by the assessee, therefore, the request f…

Raka Singh, Lucknow vs. ITO Ward 1(3) Lucknow, Lucknow

ITA 361/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.361/Lkw/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Raka Singh. D-11, 12, Industrial Estate, Nr Gazipur, Tirahamau, Mau. Pan: Bbqps5727J . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Lucknow . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee By : None [Adjournment Rejected] Revenue By : Mr Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; Against The Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057011178(1) Dt. 12/10/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac/Cit(A)’] The Assessee Filed The Present Appeal U/S 253(1)(A) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’]. 2. The Case Was Called Thrice, None Appeared At The Bequest Of The Assessee. After Primary Briefing From The Revenue, We Deem It Fit To Reject The Adjournment Request & Proceed To Adjudicate The Matter Ex- Parte U/R 24 Of Itat Rules, 1963. 3. Tersely Stated Facts Borne Out Of The Case Records Are That;

For Appellant: None [Adjournment Rejected]For Respondent: Mr Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 44A

…t of judgement. Aggrieved by such determination the appellant did file an appeal before first appellate authority but failed to prosecute the same, which resulted into dismissal ex-parte in the light of judicial precedents including ‘CIT Vs BN Bhattacharjee’ [118 ITR 461 (SC)]. 6. We however from para 5 of impugned order observed that, owing to abrupt/sudden cancellation of business by major vendor UP State ITAT-Lucknow Page 3 of 4 Raka Singh Vs ITO ITA No.361/LKW/2023 AY: 2014-15 Road Transport Corp. [‘UPSRTC’], the appellant landed in financial crises. Depression & aggravated poor health constrained the asse…

Shree Kalika Devi Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Karad, Karad vs. ITO Ward 1, Satara

ITA 419/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.419/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shree Kalika Devi Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit 6/1, Kasar Galli, Guruwar Peth, Karad Ta.: Karad, Dist.: Satara-415110 Pan: Aaaak3735D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Satara . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Kishor Phadke [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1)(A) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac/Cit(A)’] Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059407077(1) Dt. 05/01/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 15/06/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Kishor Phadke [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249(2)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 80P(2)

…remained unattended & un-responded. In absence of any representation or written submission from the assessee, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal ex- parte on dual grounds viz; (1) for non-prosecution by the assessee in view of ‘CIT Vs B.N. Bhattacharya’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)] and (2) appeal was time barred by limitation as prescribed u/s 249(2) of the Act. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee brought up this appeal challenging the action of Ld. NFAC on violation of principle of natural justice and denial of deduction on merits. 3. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material placed on record in light of rule 18 o…

Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Ahmednagar

ITA 392/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.392/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit At Post: Maldad, Tal.:Sangamner, Dist.: Ahmednagar-422608 Pan: Abbak1395E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 80P(2)

…4 which however remained un-responded. In absence of any representation or written submission from the assessee, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution by relying on the catena of decision of including ‘CIT Vs B.N. Bhattacharya’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)]. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee society brought up this appeal challenging the action of Ld. NFAC on violation of principle of natural justice and denial of deduction on merits. ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 4 Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit ITA No.392/PUN/2024 AY: 2018-19 3. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the mat…

M/S Midas Shelters Private Limited, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 14(3), Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 287/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…e CIT(A)'s detailed discussion herein in para-4 onwards proceeding ex-parte but also to the fact that case law CIT vs Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 and CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC) has been applied to affirm the impugned penalty. Mr. Bora further sought to buttress the point that both the learned lower authorities have wrongly recorded their unanimous finding of fact that the assessee had not filed any reply in penalty proceedings whereas the relevant factual position speaks otherwise. His further case is that it w…

The Jalgaon Peoples Co-Operative Bank Limited, Jalgaon vs. DCIT Circle-1 Jalgaon, Jalgaon

ITA 185/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.185/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Jalgaon People Co-Op. Bank Ltd. 152, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon-425001. Pan: Aacat1603M . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)

…4 which however remained un-responded. In absence of any representation or written submission from the assessee, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution by relying on the catena of decision of including ‘CIT Vs B.N. Bhattacharya’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)]. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee society brought up this appeal challenging the action of Ld. NFAC on violation of principle of natural justice and denial of deduction on merits. 3. The case was called twice, none appeared on bequest of the appellant assessee nor there any application for adjournment filed. In view thereof we deem it appropriate t…

Dule Singh Raghuvanshi, Village Kiloki Akaladuna Dhar vs. ITO-Dhar, Aaykar Bahwan Chanakyapuri Dhar

In the result the appeals of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 23/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bvdpr0209M Assessee By Shri Miland Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2024

Section 115BSection 144Section 69A

…CIT(A) has observed in para 7 of the impugned order as under:- “7. In light of the above details of non-compliance and non- pursuance of appeal, reference is made to the following judicial ruling of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya (1977) 118 ITR 461(SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with the issue of pursuing of appeal has stated that “preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it”. The Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi, in CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd, as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi), when faced with a similar situation of non-pursuing of appeal dism…

Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Mumbai vs. 24(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 204/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Ridhisha Jain

Section 10(38)Section 68

…case of M/s Chhabra, Land and housing Ltd. after following 03 in the case of M/s Chhabra, Land and housing Ltd. after following the decision of H the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. on'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattachargee, 118 ITR 461 [SC] held that the appeal does not mean Bhattachargee, 118 ITR 461 [SC] held that the appeal does not mean Bhattachargee, 118 ITR 461 [SC] held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it. merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it. 6.2 The Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai in ITA…