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

Sh. Mahima Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6306/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Mahima Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, N-18, N Block Market, Greater Circle-16(1), New Delhi Kailash Part-I, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

…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. 6. 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. 7. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it would be at libert…

M/S. Hanuman Apartment Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution

ITA 2122/KOL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2006-07 M/S Hanuman Apartment Acit, Circle-9, बनाम Pvt. Ltd., 156-A, Rabindra Kolkata / Sarani, Room No.213, V/S. Kolkata-700013 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2006-07, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-16, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.08.2018 Passed In Case No.401/Cit(A)-16/Cir-9/2006-07, Involving Proceedings U/S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’.

Section 144

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2006-07 M/s Hanuman Apartment ACIT, Circle-9, बनाम Pvt. Ltd., 156-A, Rabindra Kolkata / Sarani, Room No.213, V/s. Kolkata-700013 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT-SR-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2006-07, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-16, Kolkata’s order d…

Sonu Kumar Bhagat, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 63(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1709/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Sonu Kumar Bhagat Vs. Ito, Ward-63(2), Kolkata

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT DR

…interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :- (1). In the case of CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharjee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that : 2 Sonu Kumar Bhagat. A.Y: 2012-13 “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (2). In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made…

Irshad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine for want of prosecution

ITA 5740/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

…the part of the assessee shows that he is not interested in prosecuting the appeal field by him. Therefore, following the decisions mentioned below, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution:- 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461. 2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.). 3. However, if the assessee, through proper application, satisfy the Bench for non- appearance on the date of hearing, the Tribunal may, at its discretion, recall this order. 4. In the result, the appeal…

M/S Aakriti Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 842/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 253

…wan 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. D. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs.B. Bhattachargee and 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. (2) Respectfully following the order of ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd, (supra) and in view of the legal position and judicial precedents as mentioned earlier, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine…

Rajbir Singh, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(2), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine for want of prosecution

ITA 2588/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2014-15 Rajbir Singh, Vs. Ito, Vpo-Machhgarh, Ward-11(2), Ballabgarh, Faridabad. Faridabad. Pan: Cslps0214B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amit Jain, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2019 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.DR

…s, if any. This shows that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal field by him. Therefore, following the decisions mentioned below, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution:- 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461. 2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.). 3. However, if the assessee, through proper application, explains the reasons for such non-appearance, the Tribunal may, at its discretion, recall this order. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the as…

Sh. Om Prakash, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4750/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K. Hauthang, Sr.D.R

…rd, placed reliance upon following case laws:- 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another, 118 ITR 461(SC). 4. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited above, dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11th March, 2019. [PRASHANT MAHARISHI] [AMIT SHUKLA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11th March, 2019…

M/S Ksmn & Company, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine for want of prosecution

ITA 2237/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Ksmn & Company, Vs. Acit, C/O Ksmn & Co., Ca, Circle 37(1), 137, Tribhuvan Complex, New Delhi. Ishwar Nagar, Mathura Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaifk7757L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15Th March, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-20, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. This Appeal Was Last Fixed For Hearing On 27Th December, 2018 & Since None 2. Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee, This Case Was Adjourned For Hearing To Today, I.E., 11Th March, 2019. However, Despite Notice, When The Name Of The Assessee Was Called None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Petition Seeking Adjournment Of The Case Was Filed. This Type Of Conduct On The Part Of The Assessee Shows That It Is Not Interested In Prosecuting The Appeal Field By It. Therefore, Following The Decisions Mentioned Below, The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution:- 1. Cit Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 Itr 461. 2. Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. Cwt, 223 Itr 480 (M.P.). 3. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 Itd 320 (Del.).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

…n the part of the assessee shows that it is not interested in prosecuting the appeal field by it. Therefore, following the decisions mentioned below, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution:- 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461. 2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.). 3. However, if the assessee, through proper application, explains the reasons for such non-appearance, the Tribunal may, at its discretion, recall this order. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the as…

Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Limited, Shahjahanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 123/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoora.Y. 2013-14

…e place reliance upon the following case laws: 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another 118 ITR 461(SC) 3. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. The assessee may, however, get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 08/03/2019.…

Springfield International Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), Vadodara

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2674/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.2674/Ahd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Springfield International Ltd., Vs. ITO, Plot No. 285/305, Opp. Shanti Ward – 2(1)(3), Niketan Soceity Behind Mazux Vadodara. Mall, Gorai Bus Depot, Gorai – II, Mumbai – 400 092. [PAN No. AAHCS 0301 G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : --None-- Respondent by : Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 08.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.03.2019 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant app…

Assadullah Allie, Srinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Srinagar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 142/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai. T. A. No. 142/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)

…of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 (MP); CIT v. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismissing the appeals in limine for want of prosecution. Reference here may also be drawn to the decision in CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee [1979] 118 ITR 461 (SC), wherein it stands clarified that preferring an appeal does not mean merely filing the appeal papers, but effectively pursuing it. The Apex Court has per its’ recent larger bench decision in Ram Siromani Tripathi & Ors. vs. State of UP (in Civil Appeal Nos. 3 Assadullah Allie v. ITO 9142-9144 of 2010 & CA No.6156/2012, dated 07.2.2019 (cop…

M/S Rana Iron & Power Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 3617/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 253

…wan 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. D. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs.B. Bhattachargee and 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. (2) Respectfully following the order of ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd, (supra) and in view of the legal position and judicial precedents as mentioned earlier, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine…

Neelgaur Trust, Kolkata vs. CIT(Exemption) Kolkata, Kolkata

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

ITA 85/KOL/2017[]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Neelgaur Trust Vs. Cit(E), Kolkata

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT
Section 12A

…appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :- 2 Neelgaur Trust A.Y: 2009-10 (1). In the case of CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharjee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that : “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (2). In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their orde…

Shri Devinder Pal, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Moga

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 762/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 762/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 (MP); CIT v. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismissing the appeals in limine for want of prosecution. Reference here may also be drawn to the decision in CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee [1979] 118 ITR 461 (SC), wherein it stands clarified that preferring an appeal does not mean merely filing the appeal papers, but effectively pursuing it. The Apex Court as per its recent larger bench decision in Ram Siromani Tripathi & Ors. vs. State of UP (in Civil Appeal Nos. 9142-9144 of 2010 & CA No.6156/2012, dated 07.2.2019 (copy on record), dismissed the ap…

M/S H R. Logistics, Surat vs. ITO, Ward3(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 6

ITA 703/SRT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.703/Srt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16 H.R.Logistics, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 126, Municipal Shopping Centre, Ward-3(1)(4), Surat. Sahara Darvaja, Ring Road, Surat. [Pan: Aaffh 4624 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul R.Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Prasoon Kabra – Sr.Dr

Section 40ASection 68

…H.R.Logistics Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Surat /ITA No.703/SRT/2018/A.Y. 2015-16 Page 1 of 4 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.703/SRT/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16 H.R.Logistics, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 126, Municipal Shopping Centre, Ward-3(1)(4), Surat. Sahara Darvaja, Ring Road, Surat. [PAN: AAFFH 4624 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri Mehul R.Shah – CA राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by Shri Prasoon Kabra – Sr…

Labhubhai De vs. Hibhai Zalavadia, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 6

ITA 671/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.671/Srt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Labhubhai Devshibhai Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Zalavadia, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat. 37, Ranchhodnagar, Aakar Club, Brts Simada, Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat. [Pan: Aadpz 7652 G] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Mehul R.Shah – Ca िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Prasoon Kabra – Sr.Dr राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 26.02.2019 सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 27.02.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The 1. Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Surat(In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 23.07.2018 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under : 2. “1. The C.I.T.(Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant Thereby Confirming Addition Of Rs.98,65,306/- Made By The Assessing Officer. 2. The C.I.T.(Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing An Ex Parte Appellate Order On 23.07.2018 Without Considering The Adjournment Application Filed By The Appellant On 17.07.2018 Asking Time Of 15 Days.”

…Shri Labhubhai Devshibhai Zalavadia Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat /ITA No.671/SRT/2018/A.Y. 2012-13 Page 1 of 3 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.671/SRT/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Labhubhai Devshibhai Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Zalavadia, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat. 37, Ranchhodnagar, Aakar Club, BRTS Simada, Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat. [PAN: AADPZ 7652 G] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Mehul R.Shah – CA िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by S…

Dakshaben Dilipkumar Shah, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 6

ITA 559/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.559/Srt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Dakshaben Dilipkumar Shah, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 104, Sukhsagar Apt., Behind Ward-1(3)(1), Surat. Kakadia Complex, Ghod Dod Road, Surat. [Pan: Adrps 1096 E] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K.Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Prasoon Kabra – Sr.Dr

…Shri Dakshaben Dilipkumar Shah Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat /ITA No.559/SRT/2018/A.Y. 2014-15 Page 1 of 3 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.559/SRT/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Dakshaben Dilipkumar Shah, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 104, Sukhsagar Apt., Behind Ward-1(3)(1), Surat. Kakadia Complex, Ghod Dod Road, Surat. [PAN: ADRPS 1096 E] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri Kiran K.Shah – CA राज"व क" ओर से…

Rajendra Management Group, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-62(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed

ITA 2043/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R

…t of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and also the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) wherein their Lordships held that “the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same”. In view of the above, respectfully following the aforecited decisions, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted. 4. In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed. Order pronounced in t…

Bhim Pal Dagar, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed

ITA 4705/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R

…t of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and also the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) wherein their Lordships held that “the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same”. In view of the above, respectfully following the aforecited decisions, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted. 4. In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed. Order pronounced in t…

M/S. Priya Tissue Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5205/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Priya Tissue Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 13/34, Wea Karol Bagh, Ward-14(4), New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccp7231P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR

…rested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution. In our above view, we find support from the following decisions:- (i). In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that “The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (ii). In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order: “if…