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

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

In the result all the above appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 916/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

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…

Sanni Kadian, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 6544/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 6544/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sanni Kadian, Vs Income Tax Officer, Rz-55, B-Block, Old Roshanpura Ward-43(2), Extension, Najafgarh, New Delhi New Delhi-110043 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amxpk5912G Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.11.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Delhi.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. 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) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. 7. So, respectfully by following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee is at 3 Sanni Kadian liberty to request for setting aside this order by moving an application…

Prodyut Kr. Mondal, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-26(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1048/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Sept 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Prodyut Kr. Mondal Vs. I.T.O, Ward-26(2), Kolkata Mondal Para, Kusthia, Sonarpur, South 24 Pargansas, W.B. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aoipm 0043 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By :None Respondent By :Shri Sallong Yaden, Acit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/09/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2017 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)-7, Kolkata Dated 28.05.2015. 2. This Appeal Came For Hearing Today I.E. On 20.09.2017 But None Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Petition Was Filed. However, Notice Was Sent By Itat In Past I.E. On 07.08.17, But None Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee On The Date Of Hearings. It Means That The 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:- “1. In The Case Of Cit Vs B.N.Bhattachrgee & 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 : “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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, ACIT

…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:- “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 :…

Shri Girish Devjibhai Chauhan, Dahod vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Dahod

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1745/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1745/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Girish Devjibhai Ito Ward -1 बनाम/ Chauhan, Dahod Vs. Prop. Vishat Distributors, No.6, Ashirwad Society, Dahod - 389151 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abkpc 6492 K .. (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. 1745/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Girish Devjibhai ITO Wa…

Akash Diamond, Banaskantha vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Banaskantha Circle, Palanpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1698/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1698/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Akash Diamond J.K. Acit बनाम/ Building, Banaskantha Circle Vs. Nr. Janta Building Tal Palanpur. Deesa/Dist. Banaskantha-385535 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaefa 3793 L .. (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. 1698/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Akash Diamond J.K. ACIT बनाम…

M/S. Cas Chem Engineers, Panchmahal vs. The Joint CIT, Panchmahal Range, Panchmahal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1696/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1696/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Cas Chem Engineers, The Jcit, बनाम/ Plot No.933-934, Gidc Panchmahal Range, Vs. Estate, Halol, District Civil Lines, Godhra, Panchmahals State District Panchmahal, Gujarat – 389 350 State Gujarat–389 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfc 3482 F .. (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. 1696/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s. CAS CHEM Engineers, The…

Shri Naishadkumar N. Patel, Anand vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1446/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1446/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Shri Naishadkumar N. Patel, Acit बनाम/ C/O. Mini Sarvodyod Sira, Anand Circle Vs. 214, Gidc Estate, Anand. Vithal Udyognagar, Dist. Anand - 388121 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adopp 8880 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, 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. 1446/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Shri Naishadkumar N. Patel,…

Shri Sodha Vaju Bhai, Kolkata vs. The ITO, WD-1, Haldia

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

ITA 351/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2010-11

…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 wo…

Nisha P Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 6272/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Nisha P. Shah Ito-21(1)(3), 6Th Floor, 21, Govind Nagar Vs. Pratykshakar Bhavan, Chs Ltd. 88, Dixit C-10, Room No. 607, Road, Vile Parle (E) Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400057 Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Abips0043G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/09/2017

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR

Section 143(3)

…to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard, we place reliance upon following case laws: 1. Estate of Late TukojiraoHolkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 2. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 3. CIT vs. B. N. BhattachargeeAnd Another 118 ITR 461(SC) 3. On merit we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has taken into account the concerned documents and the contentions of the authorized representative of the assessee and then confirmed (i) the addition of Rs.34,58,657/- made by the AO towards bogus purchases, (ii) disallowance of Rs.1,33,025/- made by the AO towards VAT on the above bogus purchases. We…

Pushpak Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5357/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 5357/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Pushpak Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O Kailash Jogani, Chartered Central Circle-11, Accountant, 299/15, Shanti Vihar, New Delhi Opp. Hislop College Lane, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecp0091R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Smt. Paramita Tripathy, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.07.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxxi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathy, 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) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. 3 Pushpak Infratech Pvt. Ltd. 7. So, respectfully by following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee is at liberty to request for setting aside this order by moving a…

Erhard Muhr Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ADIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

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

ITA 3066/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2011-12

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

…ears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. My 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…

M/S. Helvetica Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 2906/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2012-13

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

…s that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non- prosecution. My 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:- 2 “If the party, at whos…

Durgapur Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-1, Kolkata

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

ITA 661/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13

Section 263

Prankrishna Bag, Purba Medinipur vs. ITO, WD-27(3), Haldia, Purba Medinipur

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

ITA 1022/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Prankrishna Bag Vs. I.T.O Ward-27(3), Haldia Nandakumar, Purba Medinipur, Pin 721643. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajapb 7873 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By :None Respondent By :Shri Kalyan Nath, Acit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata Dated 13.03.2015. 2. This Appeal Came For Hearing Today I.E. On 07.09.2017 But None Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Petition Was Filed. However, Notice For Hearing Was Sent Itat In Past On 31.07.17 But Also None Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee On The Date Of Hearings. It Means That The 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:- “1. In The Case Of Cit Vs B.N.Bhattachrgee & 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 : “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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kalyan Nath, ACIT

Ramesh N. Kher, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Anand

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 735/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Section 143(3)

…as per the acknowledgement slip available on record. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue its case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Assessment Year : 2008-09 Page 2 of 2 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…

Bikash Infra and Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. JCIT, Range-2, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 182/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.182/Ctk/2016 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Bikash Infra & Marketing (P) Vs. Jcit Range-2, Ltd., N-3-256, Irc Village, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aadcb 8224 H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Passed In Itappeal No.0394/2015-16, Dated 18.2.2016, U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act. 2. This Appeal Came For Hearing Today I.E. On 24.08.2017. The Notice Was Sent To The Assessee For Hearing By Registered Post With Ad On 21.07.2017 To The Address Given By The Assessee In Column No.10 Of Form No.36. However No One Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee On The Date Of Hearing. 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 :- “1. In The Case Of Cit Vs B.N.Bhattachrgee & 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.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CITDR

Section 143(3)

…s 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 :- “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 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 Rameshbhai Nanubhai Patel, Bhavnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2428/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

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

For Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘सी’ अहमदाबाद । 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. 2428/Ahd/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Shri Rameshbhai Nanubhai The ITO, बनाम/ Patel, Ward – 1(1), Vs. Plot No.3, Ajaywadi, Bhavnagar. Subhashnagar, Bhavnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADJPP 9348 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant by : ""यथ" क" ओ…

Venketshwara Tex -O-Fab, Pvt.Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2609/AHD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2017AY 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…the postal remark “left”. No information regarding change of address is available on record. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue its case. 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…

Shri Bhadrakali Patotsav Dharmik Trust, Gandhinagar vs. The CIT, Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2624/AHD/2013[-]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Aug 2017

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

For Respondent: Ms. Vasundhara Upmanya, CIT DR

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘MhMhMhMh’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ D ” 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 I.T.A. No. 2624/Ahd/2013 Shri Bhadrakali Patotsav The Commissioner of बनाम/ Dharmik Trust Income Tax Vs. 1st Floor, Nature View At & Post Nadol, Tal. Dehgam, Building, Ashram Road Gandhinagar - 382305 Ahmedabad - 380009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAMTS 4652 C .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) --None-- अपीलाथ" ओर से…

Shri Nikhil Tusharbhai Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2207/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, Sr. DR

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘chchchch’ 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 I.T.A. No. 2207/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Nikhil Tusharbhai Mehta The Income-tax…