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

M/S. Shree Adinath Epc Ventures Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp. Circle 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1628/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1628/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Shree Adinath Epc V. Income Tax, Ventures Pvt Ltd., Corporate Circle -6(1), 484, Pantheon Plaza, Chennai – 600 034. Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. [Pan: Aalca-6348-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

…he submissions made by the assessee held that, the assessee has not effectively pursued the appellate proceedings and failed to respond to various notices issued. The ld.CIT(A) also relied upon the following judgments: (i) CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharya reported ar 118 ITR 461 (ii) M/s. Chemipol vs Union of India (Central Excise Appeal No 62 of 2009) Mumbai HC (iii) Dr. P. NallaThampy vs Shankar [1994] (supp) SCC 63 (SC) (iv) Whirlpool of India Ltd vs DCIT in ITR No. 2006/Del/2011, ITAT Delhi (v) CIT vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd in ITA No. 798 of 2009 Delhi HC 5. The ld. CIT(A) relying on above decisions held…

M/S A K Munshi Yojana, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)-1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4652/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. A.K. Munshi Yojana V. Income Tax Officer – (Exemption) – 1(1) Mtnl Building, Podar Road C/O Nanubhai Desai & Co. 517 Sir Vithaldas Chambers 16, Mumbai Samachar Marg Mumbai – 400001 Pan: Aaata0904D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department Represented By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

…used the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that Ld. CIT(A) had issued notices to the assessee through ITBA portal. However, on receiving no compliance drawing support from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and another [118 ITR 461], Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 4. We are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case and after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Notice sent through ITBA Portal would not amount to service of notice as the assessee cannot be expected to visit its…

Subodh Public School Shikshan Sansthan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

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

ITA 96/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Prerna Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Chaudhary Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…. No response has been received from the appellant till date. It is reasonable to infer from the continued non-compliance that the appellant is not serious to pursue its appeal. 4.2 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively prosecuting it. Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, (1997) (223 ITR 480) (M.P.) dismissed the reference in default and for not taking necessary steps. Similar view has been taken by I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case…

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 359/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)

…d by the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT vs Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320(Del) (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) (iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) (iv) CIT vs. B. N. Bhatachargee And Another 118 ITR 461 (SC). 5.4 T he Hon'ble ITAT, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in the case of M/s Bindra Warehousing Corporation, Itarsi vs ITO, ITA No. 153/Jab/2016 and in Jabalpur Sahkari Dugdh Sangh vs ITO, ITA No. 201 to 203/Jab/2015 has found assessee as not interested in pursuing appeal on the basis of just one non-attendance before the Hon'ble Tribunal. The Tribun…

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward19(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 358/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)

Narayan Singh Rajput, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

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

ITA 19/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarayan Singh Rajput Ito-1 Wardno.2 Jamniya Road Khandwa Mundi Punasa Vs. Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bripr0714A Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024

Section 144Section 148

…o.19/Ind/2024 Narayan Singh Rajput consequently the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse for non-prosecution in para 4.1 to 4.4 as under: “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…

Krishan Kumar Yadav, Behror vs. ITO Behror, Behror

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

ITA 194/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mathur, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 250Section 69A

…en to pursue the 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. The ld. CIT(A) took reference in his appeal in the case of CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharya (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC), CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt Ltd. 38 5 KRISHAN KUMAR YADAV VS ITO, BEHROR ITD320 (Del) and Vipul Logistic & Warehousing (P) Ltd. vs ITO (Delhi ITAT) and thus dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It is also noted that the similar reasoning has been given by the ld.CIT(A) in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 by dismiss…

Sajjan Kedia HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 30(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2662/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaymr. Sajjan Kedia Huf The Income Tax Officer, 1004,K. Palam Court, Ward 30 (3) (4), Malad Link Road, Room No.604, Malad West, C- 13, Pratyashkar Vs. Mumbai- 400064 Bhavan, Pan No. Aamhs9553G Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400 051. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Prashant Mahajan - Sr. A.R

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…. CIT Appeal based his order on the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT in ITA No. 1025-1027/CHD/2005 for the A.Y. 2002-03 in the case of M/s. Chhabra Land & Housing Ltd. which followed the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B. N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 [SC] and held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same. 9. During the course of hearing even before us, the appellant neither appeared nor filed any documents/evidence in support of its claim that the entire transaction is genuine. 10. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the le…

Vikas Tiwari, Vidhisha vs. ITO, Vidhisha, Aaykar Bhawan, Vidhisha Madhya Pradesh

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

ITA 366/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivikas Tiwari Ito, Vidhisha, Aayakar Tiwari Bhawan Ward No.3 Tehsil Bhawan, Vs. Road Kurwai Vidhisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqmpt8921F Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23.04.2024

Section 250(6)Section 69A

…on merits but the same has been dismissed for non-prosecution. The concluding part of the impugned order in para 4.2 is as under: Page 2 of 4 ITANo.366/Ind/2023 Vikas Tiwari “4.2 Hon'ble Supreme Courtin the case of CIT vs. Β.Ν. Bhattacharjee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively prosecuting it. Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, (1997) (223 ITR 480) (M.P.) dismissed the reference in default and for not taking necessary steps. Similar view has been taken by I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case…

Brilliant Metals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 5(2), Delhi

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

ITA 3883/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepanshu Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ntibus non-dormientibus jura subveniunt” i.e. “the law assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights" is applicable in this case and relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. N. Bhattacharya & Another (118 ITR 461) wherein their lordships held that “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it” and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Both the parties fairly submitted that owing to non- examination of the issues, the matter may be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the issue afresh. Hence, in…

Subhash Chand Dhingra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 51(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2914/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita, CAFor Respondent: Sh.Shyam Singh, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148Section 69A

Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd, Lucknow vs. ACIT Reang-1, Lucknow

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

ITA 19/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. V. The Assistant 761, Village – Anaura Commissioner Of Near Indira Canal Income Tax Faizabad Road, Lucknow Range-I, Lucknow Pan:Aabap6918L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18 04 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 04 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR

Section 43C

…ho sleep over their right, is applicable in this case. Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No. 1025-1027/CHD/2005 for the AY 2002-03 in the case of M/s Chhabra Land & Housing Ltd. after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 [SC] held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same. Considering the above facts and material on record, it is held that the then assessing officer has made the addition on Page 5 of 8 merits considering facts of the case and no infirmity is noticed in the order of the Assessing officer, Hence the…

Ramnath Buildhome, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 746/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…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 M/s Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal…

Shweta Infrastructure & Housing (I) Pvt. Ltd., Nashik vs. DCIT, Circle 13(2)(2), 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 3851/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shweta Infrastructure & Housing Dy. Cit, Circle 13(2)(2), (I) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Samraat Head Quarters, A33, 7Th Marine Lines, Lane, Satpur Midc Road, Nice Mumbai-400020. Area, Nashik-422007. Pan No. Aajcs 4306 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2024

For Appellant: None

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 220(6)Section 246A

…prove that it is not interested in prosecution of the matter. It is held in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Ors. matter. It is held in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Ors. matter. It is held in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Ors. (118 ITR 461) by (118 ITR 461) by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the appeal does not the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursing it. The sum and mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursing it. The sum and mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursing it. The sum and substance of ratio…

Sri Vijay Mining Works, Shaikpet, Tolichowki vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 139/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad03 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, AR appeared for Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

…ail the same, he had no option to proceed ex parte, the learned CIT(A) while placing reliance on the decisions of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del), Estate of Late Tukojirao Hokar vs. CWT 223 ITR 840 (M.P) and CIT vs. B.N.Bhattachargee and another 118 ITR 461 (SC), dismissed the appeal. 6. Requirement of law under section 250 (6) of the Act is that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Even in the absence of the assessee, it is always open for the learned C…

Guddu Kanwar, Rajasthan, Sikar vs. ITO Ward 3, Sikar, Rajasthan

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

ITA 190/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) &

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 250(1)Section 250(4)Section 68

…ssment proceedings also, there has been non-compliance on part of the appellant, and AO was constrained to issue order u/s 144. 7 Guddu Kanwar vs.ITO 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…

Beehive Systems Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 4(2), New Delhi

ITA 1059/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Sood, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…mentioning ‘not admitted’. 2.1 In AY 2017-18, the ld.CIT(A) observes that notices were issued on four occasions, but, there were no response from the assessee and, therefore, following the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee, 118 ITR 461 and other judicial verdicts for similar rationale, had dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. The ld. AR has pointed out before us that as far as the issue of technical defects is concerned, the reply was submitted and as such, there were no technical defects. As for AY 2017-18, it was submitted that no notices were received. 4. Considering t…

Beehive Systems Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 4(3), New Delhi

ITA 1058/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Sood, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

Anirudha Harihar Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 390/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Anirudha Harihar Mandal 335, New Nandanwan, Nagpur-440009 Pan: Agopm9294J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Smt Veena Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…t of grounds raised by it, the Ld. NFAC after reiterating the findings of Ld. AO, has culminated the proceedings ex-parte and confirmed the additions by pressing into service the Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in ‘CIT Vs B. N. Bhattacharjee’ reported in [1997] 118 ITR 461 (SC) and other equivalent decisions. 2.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee set-up this appeal alleging the violation of principle of natural justice in the former to the merits thereof. 3. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material placed on record in light of rule 18…

Royal Drinks Ptv. Ltd., Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 371/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 371/Pun/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Royal Drinks Pvt. Ltd. 254, Small Factory Area, Wardhaman Nagar, Nagpur-440008 Pan: Aaacr9486J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Rajesh Loya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

…ds raised by it, the Ld. NFAC after reiterating the findings of Ld. AO, has culminated the appellate proceedings ex-parte and confirmed the additions by pressing into service the Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in ‘CIT Vs B. N. Bhattacharjee’ reported in [1997] 118 ITR 461 (SC) and other equivalent decisions. 2.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee company set-up this appeal alleging the violation of principle of natural justice in the former to the merits thereof. 3. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material placed on record in light of…