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 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

M/S Kaushalya Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-Xviii, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1575/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

…journed as none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It appears from this conduct of the assessee that assessee is not seriously interested in pursuing this appeal before the Tribunal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it and the law does not help a sleeping litigant. Hence, the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted. We, therefore, relying upon the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismiss the appeal of the ass…

Shroff Oil Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 377/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘बी’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD U;kf;d lnL; ds le{kA loZJh iznhi dqekj dsfM;k] ys[kk lnL; ,oa egkohn izlkn] loZJh iznhi dqekj dsfM;k] ys[kk lnL; ,oa egkohn izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{kA loZJh iznhi dqekj dsfM;k] ys[kk lnL; ,oa egkohn izlkn] loZJh iznhi dqekj dsfM;k] ys[kk lnL; ,oa egkohn izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{kA U;kf;d lnL; ds le{kA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.377/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shroff Oil Manufacturing ACIT,…

Ajay Singh Pundeer, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5491/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year : 2007-08 Ajay Singh Pundeer Vs Ito Rz-23, Kamla Park, Ward-25(4) Dharampura, Najafgarh New Delhi New Delhi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. DR

…e appeal filed by him. Therefore, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another reported in 118 ITR 461, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. However, if the assessee, through proper application can satisfy the bench for such non-appearance, the Tribunal may at its discretion recall the order. The appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 3. In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order Pronounced…

Sh. Mayank Singhee, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5465/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L. P. Sahu. I. T. Appeal No. 5465/Del/2014 Assessment Year : 2011–12. Shri Mayank Singhee, Deputy Commissioner 4 – A, Street : C – I, Vs. Of Income Tax, S A I N I K F A R M, Central Circle : 11, N E W D E L H I – 110 062. N E W D E L H I. Pan : Bxvps 2209 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E; Department By : Ms. Renu Amitabh, Cit [Dr]; Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2017 O R D E R. Per Bhavnesh Saini, J. M. :

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Ms. Renu Amitabh, CIT [DR]

…rence unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. 3 I. T. Appeal No. 5465/Del/2014 Assessment Year : 2011–12. 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 above appeal for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it would be a…

Smt. Monika Devi Khandelwal, Mathura vs. I.T.O., Ward-3(4), Mathura

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

ITA 47/AGR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

…I 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), I 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 27/09/2017. (…

M/S Blue Bird Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 135/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L. P. Sahu. I. T. Appeal No. 135/Del/2016 Assessment Year : 2011–12. M/S. Blue Bird Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner 106 – Babar Road, Vs. Of Income Tax, N E W D E L H I – 110 001. Circle : 3 (1), N E W D E L H I. Pan : Aaccb 6766 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E; Department By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D. R.; Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2017 O R D E R. Per Bhavnesh Saini, J. M. :

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D. R
Section 271(1)(c)

…erence unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. 3 I. T. Appeal No. 135/Del/2016 Assessment Year : 2011–12. 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 above appeal for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it would be a…

Raghuraj Singh, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. JCIT, Noida

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3570/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K.Pandaasstt. Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T Vasanthan, Sr. DR

…t. Therefore, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision 2 (Raghuraj Singh) of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another reported in 118 ITR 461, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. However, if the assessee, through proper application can satisfy the bench for such non-appearance, the Tribunal may at its discretion recall the order. The appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 3. In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order Pronounced…

Roohul Amin, Aligarh vs. ACIT Circle-1, Aligarh

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

ITA 183/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

…I 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), I 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 26/09/2017. (…

Phoenix Datatech Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3550/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K.Pandaasstt. Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T.Vasanthan, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Phoenix Datatech Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Now merged with Imperia Central Circle-17 Structure Ltd.) A-25, Mohan Co-operative New Delhi Industrial Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AADCP9441L Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. T.Vasanthan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26 . 09.2017 ORDER Per R.K.Panda, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 9th January, 2015 of the CIT(A)- XXVI, N…

M/S. Almora Zila Sehkari Bank Ltd., Almora vs. DCIT, Nainital

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6535/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Almora Zila Sehkari Bank Ltd. Vs DCIT Mall Road Almora Nainital (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAALA0018J Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26. 09.2017 ORDER Per R.K.Panda, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16th October, 2014 of the CIT(A)-II Dehradun relating to assessment year, 2011-12. 2. This case was fixed for hearing f…

Sh. Mohd. Naushad Ahmed, New Delhi vs. ITO, Saharanpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed, for non-prosecution

ITA 1477/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L. P. Sahu.

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D. R
Section 271(1)(c)

…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) 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 above appeals for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeals filed, then it would be…

Maha Seer Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3478/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Pandaasstt. Year : 2012-13 Maha Seer Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito House No. 2, Kasturba Gandhi Marg Ward-16(1) New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm5530B

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T Vasanthan, Sr. DR

…he appeal filed by it. Therefore, following the decision of the Delhi bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another reported in 118 ITR 461, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. However, if the assessee through proper application can satisfy the bench for such non-appearance, the Tribunal may at its discretion recall the order. The appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 3. In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. (Order Pronounced i…

Samir Vadilal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1902/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1902/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Samir Vadilal Shah Ito, बनाम/ 191, 2Nd Floor, New Cloth Ward – 5(3)(3) Vs. Market, Ahmedabad O/S. Raipur Gate, Raipur, Ahmedabad - 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acups 2052 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘,l ,l ,l-,e ,l ,e ,e-lh ,e lhlh lh-’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1902/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Samir Vadilal Shah ITO, बनाम…

M/S. Osaka Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Baroda

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1867/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1867/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Osaka Pharmaceuticals Acit बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Circle - 4 Vs. Old Nh No.8, Sankarda, Baroda Dist. Vadodara - 391350 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 6725 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : --None-- ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘,l ,l ,l-,e ,l ,e ,e-lh ,e lhlh lh-’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1867/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s. Osaka Pharmaceuticals A…

Shri Om Prakash Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 925/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…

Shri Om Prakash Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 924/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…

Shri Om Prakash Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 923/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…

Smt. Pushpa Rani Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 920/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…

Smt. Pushpa Rani Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 918/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…

Smt. Pushpa Rani Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 917/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…espite opportunities granted, the CIT(A), applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N.Bhatacharya reported in 118 ITR 461 held that the assessees are not ITA No. 923,924,925/Del/2016 interested in prosecution of the appeals filed by them and, therefore, the appeals deserve to be dismissed at the very outset. So far as the merit of the cases is concerned, he also decided the same against the assessees by observing that the assessees did not make proper compliance d…