CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

38 ITD 320Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1991#7 most cited

What is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. authority for?

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

2,264

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. · Rule 19(2) Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules · appeal dismissed non-prosecution · appeal unadmitted · appellant non-cooperation · lack of diligence · opportunity of being heard · section 250 · appellate procedure

Also reported as

223 ITR 840

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 147Section 144Section 142(1)Section 148Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 25indiaopportunity of being heardsection 250nfacinteresttotal incomedocument

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

BHOPPANA PRASAD RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/RPR/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.164, 165, 166, 167/Rpr/2026 & Ita Nos.170 & 171/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Boppana Prasad Rao 7-5-99, Flat No.14, Punarvasu Apartments, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam-530 003 (A.P) Pan : Adcpb4083D

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…al No. 62 of 2009 dated 17.09.2010 held that in cases where assesses do not want to pursue the appeal court/tribunal had inherent power to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India( P) Ltd 38 ITD 320 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480(MP) has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5.3 Accordingly, it is well settled legal position that merely by riling an appeal, it is not possible to adjudicate the matter by the appellate…

BHOPPANA PRASAD RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/RPR/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.164, 165, 166, 167/Rpr/2026 & Ita Nos.170 & 171/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Boppana Prasad Rao 7-5-99, Flat No.14, Punarvasu Apartments, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam-530 003 (A.P) Pan : Adcpb4083D

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…al No. 62 of 2009 dated 17.09.2010 held that in cases where assesses do not want to pursue the appeal court/tribunal had inherent power to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India( P) Ltd 38 ITD 320 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480(MP) has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5.3 Accordingly, it is well settled legal position that merely by riling an appeal, it is not possible to adjudicate the matter by the appellate…

BHOPPANA PRASAD RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 167/RPR/2026[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.164, 165, 166, 167/Rpr/2026 & Ita Nos.170 & 171/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Boppana Prasad Rao 7-5-99, Flat No.14, Punarvasu Apartments, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam-530 003 (A.P) Pan : Adcpb4083D

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…al No. 62 of 2009 dated 17.09.2010 held that in cases where assesses do not want to pursue the appeal court/tribunal had inherent power to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India( P) Ltd 38 ITD 320 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480(MP) has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5.3 Accordingly, it is well settled legal position that merely by riling an appeal, it is not possible to adjudicate the matter by the appellate…

BHOPPANA PRASAD RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/RPR/2026[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.164, 165, 166, 167/Rpr/2026 & Ita Nos.170 & 171/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Boppana Prasad Rao 7-5-99, Flat No.14, Punarvasu Apartments, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam-530 003 (A.P) Pan : Adcpb4083D

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…al No. 62 of 2009 dated 17.09.2010 held that in cases where assesses do not want to pursue the appeal court/tribunal had inherent power to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India( P) Ltd 38 ITD 320 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480(MP) has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5.3 Accordingly, it is well settled legal position that merely by riling an appeal, it is not possible to adjudicate the matter by the appellate…

BHOPPANA PRASAD RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/RPR/2026[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.164, 165, 166, 167/Rpr/2026 & Ita Nos.170 & 171/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Boppana Prasad Rao 7-5-99, Flat No.14, Punarvasu Apartments, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam-530 003 (A.P) Pan : Adcpb4083D

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…al No. 62 of 2009 dated 17.09.2010 held that in cases where assesses do not want to pursue the appeal court/tribunal had inherent power to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India( P) Ltd 38 ITD 320 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480(MP) has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable for dismissal for want of prosecution. 5.3 Accordingly, it is well settled legal position that merely by riling an appeal, it is not possible to adjudicate the matter by the appellate…

RACHNA DIPESH LADDHA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(2) VADODARA GUJARAT, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1922/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…material available on record. It is a well settled principle that an appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing the same. Similar view has been taken by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Multiplan (India) (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del.), holding that where the assessee does not appear or prosecute the appeal, the same can be decided on merits on the basis of material available on record. In the case of Khyati Chemicals (P.) Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD) [2022] 135 taxmann.com 200 (Ahmedabad - Trib.)/[2022] 193 ITD 446 (Ahmedabad - Trib.)[14- 12-2021], th…

T LOGIKS,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3 (1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal is noted as dismissed"

ITA 576/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 144Section 245Section 246ASection 250Section 253

…s. In such a situation, unless the statute clearly requires the court or tribunal to hear the Appeal/proceeding and decide it on merits, it can dismiss the Appeal/proceeding for." The Delhi Bench of this tribunal in CIT vs. M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del), has held that in a similar circumstances, the Appeal may be dismissed as unadmitted. In fact, the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee & ANR (1979) 10 CTR 0354: (1979) 118 ITR 0461 has held that the words "preferred an appeal" in section 245 M means more than formally filling it but effectively pursuing it. In view of the above…

KARUNESH KUMAR SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 668/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Koushlendra Tiwari, CIT DR
Section 144Section 148Section 69Section 69A

…arjee and Ors (1979) 10 CTR 354 (SC), the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs Commissioner Of Wealth- Tax (1979) 223 ITR 450 (MP) and the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del), the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine. 4. The assessee is aggrieved against these orders and has accordingly come in appeal before us. Sh. Samrat Chandra, C.A. (hereinafter referred to as the ld. AR) submitted that the order of the ld. CIT(A) had been passed in violation of the 2 Karunesh Kumar Shukla A.Y. 2018-19…

RITU KALPESH HIRAN ,SATARA vs. ITO, SATARA

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

ITA 1649/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151ASection 69A

…he appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution applying the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). 4. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal : “1. Whether on facts and in law, the notice u/s 148 dt 21.07.2022 issued in violation of provisions of Section 151A by the jurisdictional AO is invalid and void ab initio. 2. Whether on facts and in law, the notice u/s 148 dt 21.07 20…

VIJAY KUMAR JHA,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 415/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahui.T.A. Nos. 412, 413, 414 & 415/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 14-15, 15-16 & 2016-17 Vijay Kumar Jha,…………….……………………..Appellant Kanhaulidih, Near Sanskrit College, Malighat, P.O. Ramna, P.S. Mithanpura, Muzaffarpur-842002, Bihar [Pan:Adgpj3007M] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, New Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Anuj Ganguli, Ca, Appeared Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manab Adak, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 20, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 22, 2026 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148

…ed the appeals of the assessee ex-parte by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi ITA Nos. 412 to 415/PAT/2025 (A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2016-17) Vijay Kumar Jha Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Limited reported in (1991) 38 ITD 320(Del.), as the assessee did not file any submission and failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim, even after allowing sufficient opportunities. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) h…

VIJAY KUMAR JHA,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 414/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahui.T.A. Nos. 412, 413, 414 & 415/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 14-15, 15-16 & 2016-17 Vijay Kumar Jha,…………….……………………..Appellant Kanhaulidih, Near Sanskrit College, Malighat, P.O. Ramna, P.S. Mithanpura, Muzaffarpur-842002, Bihar [Pan:Adgpj3007M] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, New Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Anuj Ganguli, Ca, Appeared Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manab Adak, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 20, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 22, 2026 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148

…ed the appeals of the assessee ex-parte by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi ITA Nos. 412 to 415/PAT/2025 (A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2016-17) Vijay Kumar Jha Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Limited reported in (1991) 38 ITD 320(Del.), as the assessee did not file any submission and failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim, even after allowing sufficient opportunities. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) h…

VIJAY KUMAR JHA,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 413/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahui.T.A. Nos. 412, 413, 414 & 415/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 14-15, 15-16 & 2016-17 Vijay Kumar Jha,…………….……………………..Appellant Kanhaulidih, Near Sanskrit College, Malighat, P.O. Ramna, P.S. Mithanpura, Muzaffarpur-842002, Bihar [Pan:Adgpj3007M] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, New Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Anuj Ganguli, Ca, Appeared Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manab Adak, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 20, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 22, 2026 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148

…ed the appeals of the assessee ex-parte by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi ITA Nos. 412 to 415/PAT/2025 (A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2016-17) Vijay Kumar Jha Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Limited reported in (1991) 38 ITD 320(Del.), as the assessee did not file any submission and failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim, even after allowing sufficient opportunities. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) h…

VIJAY KUMAR JHA,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 412/PAT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahui.T.A. Nos. 412, 413, 414 & 415/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 14-15, 15-16 & 2016-17 Vijay Kumar Jha,…………….……………………..Appellant Kanhaulidih, Near Sanskrit College, Malighat, P.O. Ramna, P.S. Mithanpura, Muzaffarpur-842002, Bihar [Pan:Adgpj3007M] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, New Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Anuj Ganguli, Ca, Appeared Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manab Adak, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 20, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 22, 2026 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148

…ed the appeals of the assessee ex-parte by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi ITA Nos. 412 to 415/PAT/2025 (A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2016-17) Vijay Kumar Jha Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Limited reported in (1991) 38 ITD 320(Del.), as the assessee did not file any submission and failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim, even after allowing sufficient opportunities. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) h…

M/S. NUCLEUS FINCONS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 15(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5025/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Nucleus Fincons Pvt. Ito 15(2) (2), Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Since Strike Off By Roc From Mumbai – 400020. 24/02/2017 Through Erstwhile Director, Kishore Patki), Vs. 503, Ankita Apartments, Opp. Gymkhana, Navghar Road, Mulund, Mumbai – 400081. Pan – Aabc6734A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.09.2023, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In The Instant Case, The Ao Vide Assessment Order Dated 27.11.2019 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Has Made The Additions Of Rs.7,00,000,/- & Rs.19,88,290/- Respectively As Unexplained Income Under Section 68 Of The Act & Estimation Of Income @ 1 + 1 % Of Rs.9,94,14,500/- On Credit & Debit Side. 2 M/S. Nucleus Fincons Pvt. Ltd

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 250Section 68

…liance and/or filed no submissions and documents. Therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner decided the appeal of the assessee as ex-parte, while relying on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [38 ITD 320 (Delhi)] but not on the merits of the case and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, specifically in view of the judgment passed by the jurisdictional High Court in the case Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Premkumar Arjundas (HUF) ITA No.2336 of 2013 dated 25.04.2016 (2017) 297 CTR (Bom.) 614, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held a…

SHANKER REDDY AKKAPALLY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 194/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

…to the assessee, but there was complete non-compliance and lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal. In these circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A), relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del.), wherein it was held that, an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant does not appear or pursue the appeal, and also following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. V.N. Bhattacharya [1977] 180 ITR 406 (SC), proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex parte. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was d…

SHANKER REDDY AKKAPALLY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 189/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

…to the assessee, but there was complete non-compliance and lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal. In these circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A), relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del.), wherein it was held that, an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant does not appear or pursue the appeal, and also following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. V.N. Bhattacharya [1977] 180 ITR 406 (SC), proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex parte. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was d…

YOGESH SOOD,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), BHOPAL

In the result we are of the considered opinion that the

ITA 424/IND/2025[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 69C

…teps. Considering the conduct of the assessee in the present circumstance, I am of the view that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. This view has been affirmed by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del) wherein the ITAT had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of persuasion. Under these circumstances, the present appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed. 4.3 Since there is no submission or material available on record relating to merit and in support of grounds on appeal as well as statement of facts, no decision is being…

SHARDA DEVI SINGH, RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. ITO, MAHASAMUND, MAHASAMUND

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

ITA 632/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 632/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sharda Devi Singh, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Shailendra Singh, Aayakar Bhawan, K-8, Rajdhani Vihar, Saddu, Mahasamund- 493445, Raipur-492001, C.G. C.G. Pan: Clzps1287D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 69

…taking steps for preparation of paper 4 Sharda Devi Singh vs. ITO-Mahasamund books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. Similar view has also been taken in the case of CIT v. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del). Following the ratio of Multiplan (India) Ltd (supra), the Chennai Tribunal has also dismissed appeal for non-prosecution. It is pertinent to add here that the laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known maxim "Vigilantibus, et non dormientibus, jura subveniunt".…

GITA SHARMA,DURGAPUR vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(4), DURGAPUR

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

ITA 2267/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

…arjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) and also the finding of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the case was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested tha…

R B DIAMOND HOUSE,JALGAON vs. PNE-C-1, RANGE -25, CIRCLE -1, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- JALGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1948/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nShri Sanjay T. TupeFor Respondent: \nSmt. Indira R. Adakil
Section 250(6)Section 69A

…he appeal following the ratio of decision of the\nHon'ble MP High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukhoji Rao Holkar vs.\nCWT reported in 233 ITR 480 and the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Branch\nin the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Limite reported in 38 ITD 320. The law\nassists those who are vigilant with their rights and not those that sleep there\nupon. Following the principle as embodied in the well known Dictum\n\"vigilantbus non dormentibus, jura subveniunt\", all the grounds raised in this\nappeal as reproduced in para 1.1 supra are dismissed.”\n5.\nDissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before t…

Showing 1–20 of 2,264 · Page 1 of 114

...