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 367,368 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 147Section 148Section 250Section 144Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 250(6)speaking ordersection 25opportunity of being heardsection 250condonation of delaysection 69aappeal before the tribunalsection 142(1)section 144section 148section 147

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

Dla Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3746/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Hon’Ble[Assessment Year : 2014-15 ]

For Appellant: Sh. Akshat Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)

…the I.T. Rules made the disallowance of Rs. 6,77,083/- to the income of the assessee. Since the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya and other, 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non prosecution. 3. Aggrieved by such order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset submitted tha…

Laxmi Pandey, Hisar vs. ITO Ward- 02, Hisar

Accordingly. The grounds raised by the assesee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5240/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…2 as unexplained. Since the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) despite repeated opportunities granted by her, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another (1997) reported in 118 ITR 461 (SC), the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Ltd. reported in 38 ITD (Delhi) 320 and the decision of Hon’ble MP High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 dismissed the appeal. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.…

Anchor Container Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-2(4), New Delhi

Accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4889/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…5,99,609/-. 4. Since the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted by her, the Ld. CIT(A) 2 relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another (1997) reported in 118 ITR 461 (SC), the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Ltd. reported in 38 ITD (Delhi) 320 and various other decisions dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing,…

Shri Virender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 3760/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(4)Section 68

…CIT(A), although the assessee had filed an adjournment application, however, Ld. CIT(A) without giving any adjournment to the assessee dismissed the appeal by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461, the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holker vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case. 6. Ld. Sr…

Shri Virender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 3759/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(4)Section 68

…CIT(A), although the assessee had filed an adjournment application, however, Ld. CIT(A) without giving any adjournment to the assessee dismissed the appeal by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461, the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holker vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case. 6. Ld. Sr…

Anil Khosla, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward 54(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6386/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K.Pandaassessment Year : 2013-14 Anil Khosla, Ito, 460/731, Badkhal Pal Road, Vs Ward-54(1), Faridabad, Haryana-121001. New Delhi. Pan-Aagpk5998M Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Ms. Shivani Bansal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2021

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…Rs.25,17,080/- by making various additions/disallowances. Since none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the CIT(A) despite service of notices, the CIT(A) following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs B. N. Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. I have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). It is a…

Dharampal Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4059/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41(1)

…d and after hearing Ld. Sr. DR. 4. A perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) order shows that he has dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee due to non prosecution by relying the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B N Bhattacharya 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). He has not decided the appeal on merit and the so-called decision on merit also is very cryptic in two/three lines. As per the provisions of section 250 (6) the order of the CIT(A) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and…

Pramod Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 32(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 3943/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…ent through speed post on 1st June 2017 fixing the date of hearing for 15th June, 2018. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Mulltiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. He , however, while deciding the appeal on merit has simply sustained the addition made by the AO in a cryptic order. Considering the totality of the fa…

Hussainullah Hafiz, Burhanpur vs. ITO, Burhanpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution

ITA 31/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

…ffective persuasion also. In view of these facts, we are of the view that the appeal of the assessee is liable for dismissal. Our view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements: i) In the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that: “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” ii) In the case of Estate of late TukojiraoHolkar v. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their or…

Shri Rishi Sagar, Khanna vs. ITO, W-III, Khanna

In the result, appeals of the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 515/CHANDI/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 515/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sh. Rishi Sagar, The Ito, Ward-Iii, बनाम Jethi Nagar,St. No. 7, Khanna Malerkotla Road, Near Satk Filling Station, Khanna "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bcpps4753N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Sr.DR

…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. 5. Their Lordships of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another’ (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. 6. So, by respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss this appeal for non-prosecution. 7. In the result, appeals of the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court. (…

Rohit Chechi, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 61(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the Assessee’s Appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 3525/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR

…ing of the case. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the issue has followed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya 118 ITR 461 and the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holder vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP). Further, while deciding the appeal on merit, the Ld. CIT(A) has also rejected the various additional evidences filed before her. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one final opportunit…

Rohit Chechi, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 61(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the Assessee’s Appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 3524/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR

…ing of the case. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the issue has followed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya 118 ITR 461 and the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Holder vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP). Further, while deciding the appeal on merit, the Ld. CIT(A) has also rejected the various additional evidences filed before her. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one final opportunit…

Aasl India Finvest Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4418/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Aasl India Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito, Kp-23, 3Rd Floor, Ward 1(1), Pitampura, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aaeca2150L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nipun Mittal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19Th March, 2019 Of The Cit(A)-32, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee In Its Various Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Ex Parte Order Of The Cit(A) In Sustaining The Disallowance/Addition Made By The Ao.

For Appellant: Shri Nipun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…41/- and added wrong claim on long-term capital gain of Rs.5,09,445/-. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite service of notice, the ld.CIT(A), following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee, 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and various other decisions, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival arguments m…

Tushar Sharma, Sikandrabad vs. ITO Ward - 3(3), Bulandshahr

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4263/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 Tushar Sharma, Vs Ito, C/O Rra Taxindia, Ward 3(3), D-28, South Extn. Part –I, Bulandshahr. New Delhi. Pan : Asqps4748F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Monika Ghai Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29Th March, 2019 Of The Cit(A), Ghaziabad, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee In Its Various Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Ex Parte Order Of The Cit(A) In Sustaining The Disallowance/Addition Made By The Ao.

For Appellant: Ms Monika Ghai AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148

…urnment applications for which the ld.CIT(A), following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee, 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CIT, 223 ITR 480, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. However, she has also decided the appeal on merit and sustained the addition made 2 by the AO on the ground that the assessee failed to substantiate the source of cash dep…

Sahni Pipes P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-22(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7573/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Sahni Pipes P. Ltd., Vs Acit, D-835, New Friends Colony, Circle-22(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aalcs7563G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pushparaj Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19Th September, 2018 Of The Cit(A), New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee In Its Various Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Ex Parte Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining Various Additions Made By The Ao.

For Appellant: Shri Pushparaj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

…63/- wherein he made addition of Rs.3,14,35,595/- u/s 68 of the Act. In appeal, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on account of non-appearance of the assessee by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Anr., 118 ITR 461 and the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the authorities below. We find, due to non-ap…

M/S. J.D. Automobiles & Allied Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC - 3 (2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the

ITA 291/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.289, 290 & 291/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.J.D.Automobiles & Allied Income Tax, Services Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(2), 90, Madhavaram High Road, Chennai Perambur, Chennai-600 011. Pan: Aadcj 2101M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 234ASection 250

…there was no response from the assessee to avail opportunity to file the details. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) has proceeded to pass ex-parte order by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine. The learned CIT(A) has also rejected various grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on additions made by the proceedings. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed appea…

M/S. J.D. Automobiles & Allied Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC - 3 (2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the

ITA 290/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.289, 290 & 291/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.J.D.Automobiles & Allied Income Tax, Services Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(2), 90, Madhavaram High Road, Chennai Perambur, Chennai-600 011. Pan: Aadcj 2101M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 234ASection 250

…there was no response from the assessee to avail opportunity to file the details. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) has proceeded to pass ex-parte order by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine. The learned CIT(A) has also rejected various grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on additions made by the proceedings. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed appea…

M/S. J.D. Automobiles & Allied Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC - 3 (2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the

ITA 289/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.289, 290 & 291/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.J.D.Automobiles & Allied Income Tax, Services Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(2), 90, Madhavaram High Road, Chennai Perambur, Chennai-600 011. Pan: Aadcj 2101M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 234ASection 250

…there was no response from the assessee to avail opportunity to file the details. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) has proceeded to pass ex-parte order by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine. The learned CIT(A) has also rejected various grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on additions made by the proceedings. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed appea…

Dinesh Kumar, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 39(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal is allowed for

ITA 4004/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conference) A.Y. : 2010-11

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

…Ld. First Appellate Authority has decided the issues in dispute against the assessee on account of non-compliance and non-pursuance of appeal by respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1977) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan Indian Pvt. Ltd, reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). But we are of the view that no doubt that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has decided the appeal exparte assessee on merits also, but in the interest of justice the sufficient opportunity has not been given for…

Smt. Dropati Bharat Godambe, Mumbai vs. ITO-11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in the terms indicated above

ITA 1945/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2020AY 2011-12
Section 54F

…37,235 3. When this appeal was taken up for the hearing, it was noticed that the learned CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the matter ex parte by observing as follows:- 2. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattachargee & Others in 118 ITR 461 (SC) that appeal does not mean only filing of memo, but also pursuing it effectively, in case where the assessee does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authority have inherent right to dismiss the appeal for non prosecution. As also held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chempol vs. Union of India in excise appeal No.62…