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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.?

2,267 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 142(1), Section 148, Section 143(3).

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320)

M/S Midas Shelters Private Limited, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 14(3), Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 287/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…43(3) assessment dated 27.12.2018. 4. Learned counsel on the other hand invited our attention not only to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion herein in para-4 onwards proceeding ex-parte but also to the fact that case law CIT vs Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 and CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC) has been applied to affirm the impugned penalty. Mr. Bora further sought to buttress the point that both the learned lower authorities have wrongly recorded their unanimous finding of fact that the assessee had not filed any reply i…

Dule Singh Raghuvanshi, Village Kiloki Akaladuna Dhar vs. ITO-Dhar, Aaykar Bahwan Chanakyapuri Dhar

In the result the appeals of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 23/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bvdpr0209M Assessee By Shri Miland Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2024

Section 115BSection 144Section 69A

…), the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with the issue of pursuing of appeal has stated that “preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it”. The Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi, in CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd, as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi), when faced with a similar situation of non-pursuing of appeal dismissed the appeal of Revenue. The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the following maxin- “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”. In view of the above, it is clear that the appellant is not int…

Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Mumbai vs. 24(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 204/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Ridhisha Jain

Section 10(38)Section 68

…appeal. Accordingly, by applying the ratio laid down by the ITAT appeal. Accordingly, by applying the ratio laid down by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [(1991) 38 ITD 320], we dismiss this appeal filed by the [(1991) 38 ITD 320], we dismiss this appeal filed by the [(1991) 38 ITD 320], we dismiss this appeal filed by the Appellant Appellant-assessee as not maintainable. 3. In the result, the appeal is dismissed." 3. In the result, the appeal is dismissed." Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani 4 6.3 The Hon'ble Income Tax Appell…

Saj Flight Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 185/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G.Suresh, JCIT

Section 143(3)

…h sections 147 and 250 of the Act before this tribunal. Vide order ITA No.185/Mds./2014 dated 20.03.2014. This tribunal had dismissed the appeal in view of non-compliance on the part of the assesse by applying the judicial ratio laid down in CIT vs Multi Plan 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). The assesse again pleaded for restoration of its appeal and consequently vide MA No.91/Chny/2018 dated :- 2 -: 13.10.2023, the appeal of the assesse was allowed and restored for adjudication. 2. Material available on record indicate that even though this is the second round of adjudication before this tribunal, the assesse has chosen to…

Bindu Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 380/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.380/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

…ng that the assessee was provided many opportunities but no compliance was made. The details of these opportunities was given in the appellate order at para 4.1. Thereafter, he applying the ratio of the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. 38 ITD 320, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as unadmitted. 3 Bindu Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., AY: 2011-12 6. From the perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we note that case was listed on 8 different occasions when no compliance was made by the assessee and thus, after referring to certain case laws has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as unadmitted. In…

Subodh Public School Shikshan Sansthan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

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

ITA 96/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Prerna Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Chaudhary Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, (1997) (223 ITR 480) (M.P.) dismissed the reference in default and for not taking necessary steps. Similar view has been taken by I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (1991) (38 ITD 320). Considering the above, it appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed for non- prosecution. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.’’ 2.2 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it is noted from the orders of the ld.…

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 359/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)

…59/Mum/2024 AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 3 Bright Builders & Developers v. ITO requires effective prosecution also. Therefore, the appeal is found liable for dismissal. This view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT vs Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320(Del) (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) (iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) (iv) CIT vs. B. N. Bhatachargee And Another 118 ITR 461 (SC). 5.4 T he Hon'ble ITAT, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in the case of M/s Bindra Warehousing Corporation, Itarsi vs ITO, ITA No. 153/Jab/2016 and in Jabalpur Sahkari…

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward19(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 358/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)

…59/Mum/2024 AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 3 Bright Builders & Developers v. ITO requires effective prosecution also. Therefore, the appeal is found liable for dismissal. This view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT vs Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320(Del) (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) (iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) (iv) CIT vs. B. N. Bhatachargee And Another 118 ITR 461 (SC). 5.4 T he Hon'ble ITAT, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in the case of M/s Bindra Warehousing Corporation, Itarsi vs ITO, ITA No. 153/Jab/2016 and in Jabalpur Sahkari…

Narayan Singh Rajput, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

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

ITA 19/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarayan Singh Rajput Ito-1 Wardno.2 Jamniya Road Khandwa Mundi Punasa Vs. Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bripr0714A Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024

Section 144Section 148

…hich the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the issue of prosecution of appeal has stated that- "Preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it". 4.2 The Delhi Tribunal in CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) when faced with a similar situation of non- prosecution of appeal, dismissed the appeal of revenue. 4.3 Reliance is also placed in the case of Vipul Logistic & Warehousing (P) Ltd Vs. ITO, wherein the Hon'ble Delhi ITAT has confirmed even the order of CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the taxpayer when there was no response to the notices…

Nanik Education Society, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Thane

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

ITA 4502/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Manisha Ghind., CAFor Respondent: Shri Laxmi Kant , Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(c)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250Section 5

…gh more than adequate opportunities were provided. Under these circumstances, I have no other alternative but to dismiss the appeal following the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Limited reported in 38 ITD 320 and also the decision of the Hon'ble MP High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukhoji Rao Holkar Vs. CWT reported in 233 ITR 480. The law assists only those who are vigilant with their rights and not those who sleep over their rights. Following this principle as embodied in the well known dictum "vigilantbus non dormentibus, jura subveniunt”, a…

Mr. Kamalchand Ashok Mehta, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp. Circle 1(2), Chennai

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

ITA 92/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No.92/Chny/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 Mr. Kamalchand Ashok Mehta Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 27/13, Maruthi Apartments, Income Tax, Ekambareshwarar Agraharam Street, Corporate Circle 1(2), Park Town, Chennai- 600 003. Chennai- 600 034. [Pan: Aeypa1700P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 01.05.2024 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Dated 02.03.2023 Passed By The Nfac [Cit(A)], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find The Present Appeal Was Filed With A Delay Of 256 Days. To Condone The Said Delay, The Assessee Filed Delay Condonation Petition. Upon Hearing Both The Parities & Perusal Of The Arguments

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एसएस "व"वने" र"व, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No.92/Chny/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 Mr. Kamalchand Ashok Mehta Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of 27/13, Maruthi Apartments, Income Tax, Ekambareshwarar Agraharam Street, Corporate Circle 1(2), Park Town, Chennai- 600 003. Chennai- 600 034. [PAN: AEYPA1700P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

Vikas Tiwari, Vidhisha vs. ITO, Vidhisha, Aaykar Bhawan, Vidhisha Madhya Pradesh

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

ITA 366/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivikas Tiwari Ito, Vidhisha, Aayakar Tiwari Bhawan Ward No.3 Tehsil Bhawan, Vs. Road Kurwai Vidhisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqmpt8921F Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23.04.2024

Section 250(6)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vikas Tiwari ITO, Vidhisha, Aayakar Tiwari Bhawan ward No.3 Tehsil Bhawan, Vs. Road Kurwai Vidhisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AQMPT8921F Assessee by Shri N.D. Patwa, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 23.04.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : This appeal by assessee is directed against the order dated 29.05.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (App…

Govind Paper Traders, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 745/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 68

…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 liable to be 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, appeal is liabl…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 39/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 38/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centreal Circel-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 37/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 36/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 35/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 34/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

…commencing from 04/06/2018 to 01/10/2021 however, the assessee did neither comply therewith nor attend one. In the event, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution by placing reliance on ‘CIT Vs M/s Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd.’ [1991, 38 ITD 320] and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in ‘CIT Vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd.’ [ITA No. 798/2009]. 3.3 Aggrieved by the aforestated ex-parte adjudication of first appellate forum, the appellant assessee firm set-up these appeals alleging the violation of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 4 M/s Concrete Develo…

Meghmani Dyes and Intermediates Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 111/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B. T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, SR. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.111/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Meghmani Dyes And Intermediates Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Ltd. (Now Meghmani Dyes And Income Tax, Intermediates LLP), Circle-2(1)(1), 403, White Corss, Gulbai Tekra Road, Ahmedabad Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 [PAN No.AAACU9258P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri B. T. Thakkar, A.R. Respondent by: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, SR. DR Date of Hearing 19.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2024 O R D E R PE…

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

M/S Midas Shelters Private Limited, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 14(3), Pune

Dule Singh Raghuvanshi, Village Kiloki Akaladuna Dhar vs. ITO-Dhar, Aaykar Bahwan Chanakyapuri Dhar

Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Mumbai vs. 24(1)(1), Mumbai

Saj Flight Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

Bindu Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

Subodh Public School Shikshan Sansthan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai

Bright Builders & Developers, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward19(1)(2), Mumbai

Narayan Singh Rajput, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

Nanik Education Society, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Thane

Mr. Kamalchand Ashok Mehta, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp. Circle 1(2), Chennai

Vikas Tiwari, Vidhisha vs. ITO, Vidhisha, Aaykar Bhawan, Vidhisha Madhya Pradesh

Govind Paper Traders, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centreal Circel-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Meghmani Dyes and Intermediates Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad