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 367,154 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

Rajesh Baburao Shinde, Parbhani vs. ITO, Ward- Hingoli, Hingoli

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

ITA 781/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.781/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rajesh Baburao Shinde, Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Sayala Khating, Tq. Dist. Tax Department, Nfac, Parbhani- 431402. Delhi. Pan : Czcps6546Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.08.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 142(1)Section 145Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

…more to submit except for raising the ground. 5.1 The Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No. 1025-1027/Chandi/2005 for the A.Y. 2002-03 in the case of M/s Chhabra Land and Housing Ltd, after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.Ν. Bhattachargee, 118 ITR 461 (SC) held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it. Keeping in view of the aforesaid factual position, the appeal filed by the appellant is, therefore, decided on merits. 6. The facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and had not filed any return of income for AY 2015-16. As per informatio…

Ganesh Agro Steel Industries, Nashik vs. The ACIT, Circle-1, Nashik

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

ITA 777/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…. CIT(A)/NFAC who dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution of the case before him without going into the merits of the case placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and another reported in 118 ITR 461 (SC) and Honble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol Vs. UOI in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 by observing as under : “5.2 As has been brought out above, it is evident and clear that the appellant is not interested in filing any details during the appellate proceedings and avail the opportunity under the principle of natural justice. No…

Sethu Madhavan Athrasseri, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -1(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4106/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Ms. Padmavathy S.: A.Y. : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Urmi RathodFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. AR

Section 143(1)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : A.Y. : 2011-12 Sethu Madhavan Athrasseri Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1501, Solitare, Adi Sankaracharya Central Circle - 1(2), Mumbai. Marg, MHADA Layout, Powai, (Respondent) Mumbai 400 076. PAN : AABPA5203E (Appellant) Appellant by : Ms. Urmi Rathod Respondent by : Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 12/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 O R D E R PER JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT : By this appeal, the appellant-assesse…

Ahamad Bin Mubarak Chauose, Nanded vs. ITO, Ward (1), Nanded

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1545/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1545/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ahamad Bin Mubarak V The Income Tax Officer, Chauose, S Ward-(1), Nanded. H.No.1-7-1349, Peerburhan Nagar, Nanded – 431506. Maharashtra. Pan: Alzpc8261D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/08/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(A), Kanpur Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 18.10.2024 For The A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 250Section 44A

…ple opportunities, the appellant has failed in compliance with the notices issued by this office. Hence, it is apparent that appellant is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Hon'ble Supreme Court has also observed in the case of CIT vs. B.Ν. Bhattacharya (118 ITR 461) that "preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it". It means, if the appellant is not pursuing the appeal without any reasonable cause, it may be presumed that he/she/it may not be interested in taking the issue seriously before the appellate authority or he/she/it may not be able to substantiate the groun…

Shri Omkar Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha, Sangli vs. National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1617/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1617/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Omkar Nagari Sahpat Nfac, Delhi Sanstha Ltd., Patrakar Nagar, Behind St Vs. Stand, Sangli-416416 Maharashtra Pan-Aabas8331A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: Ca Kishor Phadke Department By: Shri Amol Khairnar Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 07-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14-08-2025

For Appellant: CA Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

…of hearing fixed for 16.11.2022, 03.01.2023, 20/12/2023 and 10.03.2024 assessee either failed to appear or did not file the requisite details. As a result Ld. CIT(A) referring to the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 (SC) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 6. However considering the prayer made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties we deem it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and set aside the impugned order and remit all the issues raised in the instant appeal to…

Nisha Mukesh Kumar Jain, Bhilwara vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-1, Beawer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 131/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash G Jhunjhunwala, CA (Thr. VH)For Respondent: Sh. Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 69A

…ubramanium (AP) 112 ITR 512. Therefore, the appeal of the appellant is liable for dismissal. Such view is further supported by the following judicial pronouncements:- 1) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee and another. reported in 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that:- "An appeal means an effective appeal. An appeal withdrawn is an appeal non est as judicial thinking suggests. Purposefully interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively prosecuting it. Mere institution followed by withdrawal would cancel…

Shikha Ganeriwal, Guwahati vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 691/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT-DR

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69A

…ufficient time and opportunities and accordingly, is not maintainable. The relevant citations are briefed as under for placing reliance to adduce appellant's non- prosecution of appeal as not maintainable. 1. In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee& Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that ‘’the appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it.’’ 2. In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order ‘’if…

Kaluram Narayan Bhujbal, Wakad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 9(1) Pune, Pune

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

ITA 242/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Satish NadeFor Respondent: Smt. Shraddha Nichal

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…-. 4. Since, despite number of opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and various other decisions dismissed the appeal filed by the assesse. 3 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee had given a copy of the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B o…

Reshma Mohammed Asim Ansari, Bandra East vs. ITO-23(3)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for esult, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for esult, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2551/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Reshma Mohammed Asim Ansari, Ito-23(3)(1), Room No. 402, Mina Centre Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Vs. Building, Ahmed Zakaria Nagar, Mumbai-400012. Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Ardpa 8448 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Ravindra Poojary, Adv

Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 54

…adjudicate the appeal and, relying upon the decision of this Court in B.N. appeal and, relying upon the decision of this Court in appeal and, relying upon the decision of this Court in Bhattachargee v. State of Orissa Bhattachargee v. State of Orissa [(1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC)], held that [(1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC)], held that merely filing an appeal without pursuing it effectively amounts to merely filing an appeal without pursuing it effectively amounts to merely filing an appeal without pursuing it effectively amounts to abandonment. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the abandonment. Accordingly, the app…

Shri Kusumakar Achyut Shekatkar, Ahmednagar vs. I.to, Ward-2, Pune

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

ITA 244/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Kusumakar Achyut Shekatkar Ito, Ward 2, Ahmednagar House No.2, Fatima Housing Vs. Society Near Garden, Shrirampur, Ahmednagar – 413709 Pan: Ckjps9416B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Joshi (Through Virtual) Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2015-16 Shri Kusumakar Achyut Shekatkar ITO, Ward 2, Ahmednagar House No.2, Fatima Housing Vs. Society Near Garden, Shrirampur, Ahmednagar – 413709 PAN: CKJPS9416B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi (through virtual) Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 29-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 04.12.…

Manish Chandrakant Thakkar, Pune vs. DCIT Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 919/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Manish Chandrakant Thakkar Dcit, Circle 7, Pune Flat No.806, C-Building, Eisha Pearl, Near Kumar Prithvi, Market Vs. Yard, Kondhwa Khurd, Pune – 411048 Pan: Adkpt4681P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas P. Bora Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…4. Since the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assesse by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and various other decisions. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that all the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC were addressed to the e-mail id of the consultant with a copy to the assessee. He submitted that the assessee u…

Sh.Sudesh Verma, Dehradun vs. ITO, W-1(2)(4), Dehradun

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 86/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…s were filed nor any adjournment sought. In such situation, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. 5.3. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) (at pages 477 & 478) that appeal does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively, In cases where the appellant does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss the appeal the appeal for non-prosecution as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. U…

Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 444/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…mar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2016] 240 taxmann 133 (Bom.)/(2017) 297 CTR 614(Bom.), relying on the Supreme Court decisions in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC), CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 and CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee 118 ITR 461 (SC), the Ld. C.I.T.(A) is required to apply his mind to all issues which arise from the order appealed against before him and that he is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order and deciding the points raised in appeal by stating his reasons for the decision as such. The relevant observations of the said Bombay High…

Shafiq Ahmed, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 41(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3008/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shafiq Ahmed, Dy. Cit Circle-41(1)(1), Flat No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Building Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra Vs. No. 1 Om Sai Ekta (Sra), (East), Society, Cts No. 216, Gillbert Mumbai-400051. Hill Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400058. Pan No. Aowpa 3264 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Hasan Khan, Virtually Present

Section 148Section 148A

…case of M/s Chhabra Land & Housing Ltd. after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ltd. after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ltd. after following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 [SC] held the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 [SC] held the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee & other 118 ITR 461 [SC] held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but that the appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same.…

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

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

ITA 212/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA and Shri Vikas Yadav AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…nts of determination in appeal, decision thereon and reason for decision. 2.3 In this context, useful reference may also be made to Apex Court's decisions in the cases of CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 and CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee 118 ITR 461 (SC) for the proposition that an assessee having once filed an appeal, cannot withdraw it and even if the assessee refuses to appear at the hearing the first appellate authority can proceed with the enquiry and if he finds that there has been an under-assessment, he can enhance the assessment. Just as, once the assessment proceedings are set in m…

Kevalram Lalaram Chaudhari, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.210/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Kevalram Lalaram Chaudhari, Vs. Ito, 275, Bhagirath Nagar – 2, Anjani Ward – 3(3)(3), Road, Varachha Road, Surat – Surat 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahrpc3926F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…e by AO. Since adequate opportunities were given to him, he cannot allege contravention of principles of natural justice as held in case of P. N. Balasubramanium ,112 ITR 512 (AP). He also relied upon the decisions in cases of: (i) CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharya, 118 ITR 461 (SC), (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) and observed that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. Thereafter, the CIT(A) decided the appeal on the basis of material available on record. He observed that no additional evidence was furnished by the appellant to substantiate his claim. Before CIT(A), the appel…

Anupam Shailesh Syal, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2)(6), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1281/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1281/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Anupam Shailesh Syal, Vs. Ito, 103, 104 Jay Vijay Park, Near Ward – 3(2)(6), Sardar Bridge, Adaja, Surat-395009 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Andps7890N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca Respondent By Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2025

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…s available on record including the assessment order. Despite opportunities given to the appellant, no such corroborative evidence was submitted in support of grounds of appeal raised by her. The CIT(A) relied upon the decisions of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharya, 118 ITR 461 (SC), M/s Chemipol vs. UOI, Central Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 (Bombay), Dr. P. Nalla Thampy vs. Shankar, [(1984 (Supp) SCC 63 (SC)], New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No.2006/Del/2011, Chandha Finlease Ltd. vs. ACIT, ITA No.3013/Del/2011, CIT vs. Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd., ITA N…

Dipen Jaydeepbhai Dhimar, Tapi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Bardoli

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 131/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.131/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Dipen Jaydeepbhai Dhimar, Vs. Ito, 1, Bajar Faliya, Valod, At & Po – Ward – 1, Talod, Tal – Tapi, Tapi – 394640, Bardoli Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amzpd6196K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/07/2025

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 274Section 68

…tions made by AO. Since opportunities were given to him, it cannot allege contravention of principles of natural justice as held in case of P. N. Balasubramanium ,112 ITR 512 (AP). He also relied upon the decisions in cases of: (i) CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharya, 118 ITR 461 (SC), (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) and observed that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. Thereafter, the CIT(A) decided the appeal on the basis of material available on record. He observed that details, documents or submission were provided by the appellant to ITA No.131/SRT/2025/AY.2017-18 Dipen…

Detective and Security Services, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1025/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…unity to the appellant and erred in passing the order applying the ratio of the following decisions: I.T.A No. 1025/Ahd/2025 Detective And Security Services, A.Y. 2015-16 i) The Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N Bhattacharjee and Another 118 ITR 461 ii) The Honourable M.P High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Hofkar Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480. (iii) ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Cit Vs. Multiplan India(P) Ltd. 38 ITD 320. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,43,980/- being difference between receipts as per 26AS and receipts a…

Subhash Murarka, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Subhash Murarka C-1/85/186-R7, Swarnabhoomi, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aeqpm4578P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)

…unjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Now Diwan Oil MV CIT (2008) 206 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered, since the appellant remained absent and there was no assistance from the appellant. 4.5 In the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya reported at 118 ITR 461, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that “………..appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it……..” 4.6 The decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of M/s. Chemipol vi's. Union of India, Law Ministry, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai and The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbal (Central Excise Appeal No.62…