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 367,359 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

Charmaine Kaula, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 5137/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishicharmaine Kaula, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Mohit Malhotra, Apartment Central Circle-1(1), No.-213, Dlf Park Place, Dlf Gurgaon City, Phase-V, Sector-54, Gurgaon Pan: Bcgpk5054F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Yadav, 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: Char…

Cranberry Enterprises Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1547/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. Hangshing, CIT, DR

…ot 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.Bhattachrgee 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…

Gopal Chandra Ghosh, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle - 23, Hooghly

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

ITA 1542/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Chowdhury, Addl. CIT

…ot 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.Bhattachrgee 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…

Mrs. Rashmi Khanna, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2448/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2012-13 Sh. Arun Khanna Acit, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane Ara Centre Vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi Pan: Aajpk4362J & Ay: 2012-13 Mrs. Rashmi Khanna Acit, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane Ara Centre Vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi Pan: Aajpk4364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT- D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2012-13 Sh. Arun Khanna ACIT, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane ARA Centre vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi PAN: AAJPK4362J & AY: 2012-13 Mrs. Rashmi Khanna ACIT, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane ARA Centre vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi PAN: AAJPK4364Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT- D.R. Assessee by : None. Date of Hearing : 06.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 10 .08.…

Sh. Arun Khanna, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2447/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2012-13 Sh. Arun Khanna Acit, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane Ara Centre Vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi Pan: Aajpk4362J & Ay: 2012-13 Mrs. Rashmi Khanna Acit, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane Ara Centre Vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi Pan: Aajpk4364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT- D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2012-13 Sh. Arun Khanna ACIT, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane ARA Centre vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi PAN: AAJPK4362J & AY: 2012-13 Mrs. Rashmi Khanna ACIT, Central Circle 3 21-A, Aurangzeb Lane ARA Centre vs. New Delhi 110 001 E-2, Jhandewalan Extn New Delhi PAN: AAJPK4364Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT- D.R. Assessee by : None. Date of Hearing : 06.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 10 .08.…

M/S Narinder Kumar Khanna, Phagwara vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Indl. Taxation), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 596/CHANDI/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptamr.Narinder Kumar Khanna, Vs. The Director Of Income C/O Sh.G.P. Chadha, Main Tax (Intl. Taxation), Bazar, Hadiabad, Chandigarh. Phagwara. Pan: Bcwpk8266Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Alya, JCIT(DR)

…ssee is not interested in pursuing the appeal and the instant appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed. 3. In our above view, we get support from the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee 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.” 4. Our view further finds support from the following decisions also :- i) CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) ii) Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. Resp…

Hemant Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-42(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 2439/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri P. Maharishiassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs Hemant Kumar Ito F-82A, Mohan Garden, Peepal Road, Ward 42(5) Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. Anjpk7489B

…iwan 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. 7. 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. 8. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 08.08.2018…

Chand Singh Prop., Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Karnal

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

ITA 734/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathi, CIT(DR)

…iwan 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) 3 (Chand Singh Prop.) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. 7. So by respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order Pronounced i…

Aristo Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1462/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1462/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Aristo Infracon Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito Ward-9(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aakca 1648 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2018 Order Per M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata [In Short The Ld Cita] In Appeal No. 1947/Cit(A)-3/W-9(1)/15-16 Dated 29.05.2017 Passed Against The Order Passed By The Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata [In Short The Ld. Ao] Under Section 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 31.08.2015 For The Asst Year 2012-13. 2. This Appeal Was Listed For Hearing On Several Occasions. On The Date Of Previous Hearing On 20.06.2018 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Case Was Adjourned To 06.08.2018 & The Notice Was Sent To The Assessee Through Rpad. On 06.08.2018 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & No Adjournment Petition Was Filed. It Means That Assessee Is Not Interested To Prosecute The 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 :-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl. CIT
Section 271(1)(B)

…peal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :- 2 I.T.A. No. 1462/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 “1. In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattachrjee 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 order…

Tata Korf Engineering Services Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1880/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Aug 2018AY 2004-05
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT, DR

…ot 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.Bhattachrgee 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…

M/S Parvatiya Gramin Bank Ltd. (Now Himachal Gramin Bank), Mandi vs. JCIT, Range, Palampur

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

ITA 1576/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Geetinder Mann, 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 these appeals for non-prosecution. 7. In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court…

M/S Parvatiya Gramin Bank Ltd. (Now Himachal Gramin Bank), Mandi vs. DCIT, Circle, Palampur

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

ITA 1575/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Geetinder Mann, 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 these appeals for non-prosecution. 7. In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court…

Krishnadarshan Agency Private Limited, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 13(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 888/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Sri M.Balaganesh, Am,] I.T.A No. 888/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Krishanadarshan Agency Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- Ito, Ward-13(2), Kolkata [Pan : Aaeck 9446 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Md. Usman, CIT (DR)
Section 144

…e the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be 2 Krishnadarshan Agency Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2012-13 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 : “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 order…

Mamta Bakshi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-217, New Delhi

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1358/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Anil Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1357 & 1358/Del/2018 Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2007-08 Mamta Bakshi, DCIT, Central Circle- 17, L-107, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi. PAN : AALPB6438L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Anil Chopra, CA Department by : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 01-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 01-08-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 10.01.2018 of CIT(A)- 27, New Delhi relating to ass…

Mamta Bakshi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-217, New Delhi

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1357/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Anil Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1357 & 1358/Del/2018 Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2007-08 Mamta Bakshi, DCIT, Central Circle- 17, L-107, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi. PAN : AALPB6438L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Anil Chopra, CA Department by : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 01-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 01-08-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 10.01.2018 of CIT(A)- 27, New Delhi relating to ass…

Nirmal Malhotra, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 17, New Delhi

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

ITA 1355/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2009-10 Nirmal Malhotra, Dcit, Central Circle- 17, L-107, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Anil Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…alty of Rs.24,530/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. Since there was delay in filing of the appeal and there was non-appearance, the ld. CIT(A) applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another reported in 118 ITR 461 and the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009 dismissed the appeal and sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Since the ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merit and has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution and has not condoned the delay in…

Proficient Sales Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 9(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1503/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2009-10 Proficienit Sales Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer बनाम / 134, Mahatma Gandhi Ward-9(3), Ayakar V/S. Road, 1St Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Kolkatka-700 007 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaecp 9238 Q] Kolkata-69 J .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. K.Tiwari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2009-10 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.03.2017, In Case No.115/Cit(A)-12/Kol./Ward-9(3)/2016-17 In Proceedings U/S 144 /263/ 147/ 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Today When The Case Was Called For Hearing None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Was Any Application For An Adjournment Filed By The Assessee In Spite Of Issue Of Notice By Rpad. It Appears That The Assessee Is Not Serious 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 & 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."

Section 144

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA Before Shri P.M.Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2009-10 Proficienit Sales Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer बनाम / 134, Mahatma Gandhi Ward-9(3), Ayakar V/s. Road, 1st Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Kolkatka-700 007 Chowringhee Square, [PAN No.AAECP 9238 Q] Kolkata-69 J .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. K.Tiwari, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 31-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, J…

M/S. Coirfoam India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 1, Kolkata

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

ITA 1675/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2011-12 M/S Coirfom India Pvt. Jcit, Range-1, बनाम / Ltd. 231, Rai Bahadur P-7, Chowringhee V/S. Road, Behala, Square, Kolkata-69 Kolkatka-700 034 [Pan No.Aabcc 0303 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 25-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 17.05.2017, In Case No.118/Cit(A)-1/C-11(1)/2014-15 In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Today When The Case Was Called For Hearing None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Was Any Application For An Adjournment Filed By The Assessee In Spite Of Issue Of Notice By Rpad. It Appears That The Assessee Is Not Serious 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 & 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."

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA Before Shri P.M.Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2011-12 M/s Coirfom India Pvt. JCIT, Range-1, बनाम / Ltd. 231, Rai Bahadur P-7, Chowringhee V/s. Road, Behala, Square, Kolkata-69 Kolkatka-700 034 [PAN No.AABCC 0303 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 25-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:- This assess…

Sh. Rajesh Kumar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4682/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri N.K. Choudharyassessment Year : 2010-11 Rajesh Kumar, Vs. Dcit, 8650, Gaushala Marg, Central Circle-27, Ratan Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aahpk7644K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

…ars that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our above view finds support from the following decisions:- 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr., 118 ITR 461, wherein their Lordships have held: “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” 2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), wherein, while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default, their Lordships made the following observation:- “If the party, at whose i…

Mohan Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 15(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 795/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Mohan Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. Vs. I.T.O., Ward-15(2) Room No.2B, 56, Metcalf Street Kolkata-700012. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagcm 8611 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Mohan Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. Vs. I.T.O., Ward-15(2) Room No.2B, 56, Metcalf Street Kolkata-700012. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAGCM 8611 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24/07/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement: 24/07/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the as…