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

New Gujarat Synthetics Limited(in Liqn.), Ahmedabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1218/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meena, Sr. D.R

…none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment has been filed. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue its cases. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Consid…

New Gujarat Synthetics Limited(in Liqn.), Ahmedabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1217/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meena, Sr. D.R

Shree Ganesh Jewellery House Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Ci-8(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 973/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Shree Ganesh Jewellery House Vs. The DCIT, Circle-8(2), Ltd. Kolkata 413, Vardhan Markey, 25A, Camac Aayakar Bhawan, 4t h Floor, P- Street, Kolkata – 700016. 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAGCS 7343 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 07/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 09/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The caption…

M/S. Sati Trade Agency (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1)/Kolkata, Kolkata

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

ITA 1509/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09 M/S Sati Trade Agency (P) V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ltd. 9/12, Lal Bazar Ward-5(1), Aayakar Street, Block-B, 3Rd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Room No.10, Kolkata Chowringhee Square, [Pan No. Aalcs 6824 L] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 09-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.02.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Filed Any Adjournment Application Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That The Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit-A During The Appeal Late Proceedings. Therefore The Appeal Was Decided By The Ld. Cit-A Ex- Parte. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case Before Us As Well. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & Keeping In View The Provisions Of Rule 19(2) Of The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules As Were Considered In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 Itd 320)(Del), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…iwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference an answered 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 of the assessee for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it…

Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The ITO, WD-5(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 1322/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The I.T.O, Wd-5(4), Kolkata 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-A, 3Rd P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccv 6475 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By : None Revenue By : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 08/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-2009, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata Dated 17.03.2016. 2. This Case Was Listed For Hearing Before The Tribunal On 08.02.2018 & For This Assessee Was Informed. Today I.E. On 08.02.2018 When The Case Was Called On Board, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Request For Adjournment Has Been Filed Before The Tribunal Despite The Service Of Notice Upon The Assessee. It Seems That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Prosecuting His Appeal; Hence, The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Liable To Be Dismissed, For Non-Prosecution. In Our Above View, We Find Support From The Following Decisions: 1. In The Case Of Cit Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & 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 (M.P.) While Dismissing The Reference Made At The Instance Of The Assessee In Default Made Following Observation In Their Order: “If The Party, At Whose Instance The Reference Is Made, Fails To Appear At The Hearing, Or Fails In Taking Steps For Preparation Of The Paper Books So As To Enable Hearing Of The Reference, The Court Is Not Bound To Answer The Reference.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The I.T.O, Wd-5(4), Kolkata 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-A, 3rd P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCV 6475 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 08/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 08/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pert…

Gold View Financial Services Ltd., Howrah vs. ACIT, C. C.2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1125/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1125/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 153ASection 246A(1)(ba)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A No. 1125/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Gold View Financial Services Ltd. -vs.- A.C.I.T.., Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AABCG 9762 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. CIT,Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30.01.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 02.02.2018. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 18.01.2016 of C.I.T.(A)-23, Kolkata relating to A.Y.201…

Sudarshan Sengupta & Sons, Paschim Medinipur vs. ACIT, Cir-39, Midnapore, Paschim Medinipur

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

ITA 1524/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1524/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Sudarshan Sengupta & Sons -Vs.- Dcit, Circle-39, Midnapore [Pan : Abkfs 7361 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Nag, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…ence 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 Sudarshan Sengupta & Sons.. A.Yr.2010-11 “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…

K. Beeran Kutti, Tirupathi vs. ITO, Ward-1(1). Tirupathi], Tirupathi

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

ITA 715/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Beeran Kutti, Tirupati Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaff1370E

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 40

…f the assessee nor there is a request for adjournment of the case. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhttachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461 that appeal does not mean only filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the assessee does not want to pursue the appeal, M/s K. Beerani Kutti, Tirupati Court/Tribunal have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as held by Hon’ble High court of Mumbai in the case of M/s Chemipol Vs. Union of Ind…

Smt Rajul Modi, Kolkata vs. JCIT Cir-31, Kolkata

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

ITA 419/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 419/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangshing, CIT(DR)

Section 263

…not 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 Smt. Rajul Modi A.Yr.2011-12 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 follo…

C. Doctor & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-10(1), Mumbai Now Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 511/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 511/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) C. Doctor & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Dcit बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Bank Of Baroda Circle 1(1)(2), Vs. Building, Fuvara, Ahmedbad. Gandhi Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc 2362 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘Ckh Ckh Ckh ’ अहमदाबाद । Ckh IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सव"ी izeksn dqekj izeksn dqekj izeksn dqekj, लेखा सद"य एवं महावीर "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । izeksn dqekj BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 511/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) C. Doctor & Co. Pvt. Ltd., DCIT बनाम/ 3rd Floor, Bank of Baroda Circle 1(1)(2), Vs. Building, Fuvara, Ahmedbad. Gandhi Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACC 2362 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" /…

Landmark Probuild Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 499/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 499/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Landmark Probuild Pvt. Ltd., Ito, बनाम/ 341/8B, Swagat Park Ward 2(1)(3), Vs. Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad. Near Narayan Darshan Bunglow, Thaltej, Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad – 380 054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcl 9041 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘Ckh Ckh Ckh ’ अहमदाबाद । Ckh IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सव"ी izeksn dqekj izeksn dqekj izeksn dqekj, लेखा सद"य एवं महावीर "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । izeksn dqekj BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 499/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Landmark Probuild Pvt. Ltd., ITO, बनाम/ 341/8B, Swagat Park Ward 2(1)(3), Vs. Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad. Near Narayan Darshan Bunglow, Thaltej, Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad – 380 054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. :…

Anunay Fab Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 382/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘lh lh’ अहमदाबाद । lhlh IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सव"ी एन.के. "ब"लैया, लेखा सद"य एवं महावीर "साद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.382/AHD/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Anunay Fab Pvt. Ltd. Dy. CIT, बनाम/ 3-4, Shivalik Plaza, Circle -1, Vs. 3rd Floor, Pratyaksh Kar Opp. ATIRA, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad. Bhawan, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCA 6322 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीला…

Sanyasi Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-6(4), New Delhi, Kolkata

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

ITA 1304/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Sri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] I.T.A No. 1304/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Sanyasi Infrastructures Private Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-6(4), New Delhi, Presently I.T.O, Wd-11(2), Kolkata [Pan : Aaecm 3202 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Md. Usman, CIT DR

Section 143(3)

…he 2 Sanyasi Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2006-07 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 : “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…

Shri Gautam Das, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-32(3), Kolkata

ITA 846/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon‟Ble Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 250Section 254(2)

…s the case for non-prosecution by applying the propositions of law laid down in various judicial precedents, as follows:- 2 I.T.A. No. 846/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Sri Gautam Das “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 order…

M/S H. L. Shaw & Others (HUF), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-42/43, Kolkata

In the result, both appeal of assessee stand dismissed in limine

ITA 565/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

M/S H. L. Shaw & Others (HUF), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-42/43, Kolkata

In the result, both appeal of assessee stand dismissed in limine

ITA 564/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Abdul Rahim, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 32(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 271/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 271/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Abdul Rahim -Vs.- C.I.T.(A)-9, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Acmpr 3221 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

…not 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 Abdul Rahim A.Yr.2012-13 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…

M/S Vishaka Tradecom P Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-51(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

ITA 1650/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Sanskriti Sales Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT-3, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1473/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1473/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 271(1)(c)

…1 Sanskriti Sales (P) Ltd., AY 2010-11 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/and "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, AM & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 1473/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sanskriti Sales (P) Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN: AAMCS6590C) Kolkata-3, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 02.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement 02.01.2018 For the Appellant N o n e For the Respondent Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM Thi…

Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-8, Kolkata

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

ITA 704/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 704/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Range-8, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aadcs 6121 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. Cit,Sr.Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. CIT,Sr.DR

…not 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 Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2009-10 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…