CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Delite Buildwell Private Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Delite Buildwell Private Ltd., Vs. Acit, 151-A, Club Road, Sainik Farms, Circle-7(1), New Delhi – 110 062. New Delhi. Pan: Aaecc7113K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.K. Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravinder Singh Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, New Delhi, Dated 03.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Ground Of Appeal No.1 Of The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1(A) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Serving Notice Dt. 14.08.2019, 23.09.2019 & 05.11.2019. 1 (B) That The Ld. Cit (A) Has Failed To Place Any Evidence For Issuing Of Notice Dated 14.08.2019 For Fixing Date Of Hearing On 16.09.2019, Notice Dated 23.09.2019 For Fixing Date Of Hearing On 04.11.2015 & Notice Dated 05.11.2019 For Fixing Date Of Hearing On 02.12.2019. No Such Alleged Notices Were Received By Appellant Company At Registered Address As Mentioned In Form No. 35 Of Appeal. 1(C ) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Totally Ignored The Fact That In Form 35 There Is A Specific Column Wherein Mentioned That “Whether Notices / Communication May Be Sent On Email”. The Appellant Company Has Stated “No”. Thus The Cit(A) Has Ignored Specific Request Of The Appellant Which Is Duly Provided As Per Provisions Of Income Tax Act / Rules In Form No. 35. 1(D) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Sent Any Notice On Email Duly Stated In Form No. 35 As Vasudevinfrastructure@Qamil.Com Duly Verified By The Appellant Company From The Email Records. Thus The Passing Of Exparte Order Is Bad In Law & Deserves To Be Quashed.”

…k to the file of the authorities below. 5. On careful consideration of the above submissions, we are of the considered view that the ld.CIT(A) has passed ex parte order by applying the order of the ITAT Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 for non-prosecution. Further, from relevant part of the first appellate order, we note that the ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of the assessee raised in Form No.35, as per the requirement of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further, from a bare reading of assessment order, we also note that the AO issued notic…

Vinod Wahi, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 45(2), New Delhi

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 7108/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15

…ted 30.12.2016 before Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A)-15 dismissed the appeal observing that despite issuance of 7108.Del.2019 Vinod Wahi various notices, non-appeared for the assessee. Therefore, applying the ratio in CIT(A) vs. Multi Plan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) dismissed the appeal and at the same time observing that as no further details are available, the additions made are sustained. 3. The record shows assessee has claimed that his Authorised Representative, Sh. N. K. Kaushik, CA was suffering from cancer and had expired on 15.03.2020 and as assessee was resident of Germany, so he was not awa…

First Citizen Technologies Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

…see failed to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and failed put forth his case effectively. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on 30/01/2018 for non prosecution by relying on the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT (A), the present appeal is filed by the assessee on the grounds mentioned above. 6. None appeared or the assessee, the notices issued by the registry to the registered addressed of the assessee retuned with an endorsement ‘no such 5 AND ITA No. 698/Del/2020 First Citizen Technologies Ltd.,ND per…

First Citizen Technologies Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

…see failed to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and failed put forth his case effectively. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on 30/01/2018 for non prosecution by relying on the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT (A), the present appeal is filed by the assessee on the grounds mentioned above. 6. None appeared or the assessee, the notices issued by the registry to the registered addressed of the assessee retuned with an endorsement ‘no such 5 AND ITA No. 698/Del/2020 First Citizen Technologies Ltd.,ND per…

Avtar Kukreja, Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Faridabad

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 214/Del/2020 (A.Y 2008-09)

…also given last and final opportunities to the assessee but the assessee has not responded to the notices. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on 31/10/2012 by relying on the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. (381 ITD 320). 5. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 31/10/2012 the assessee is before this Tribunal on the grounds mentioned above. 6. None appeared for the assessee even after issuing several notices. By considering the issue involved in the appeal, we deem it fit to hear the Ld. DR and decide the matter. 7. Heard the Ld. DR, perused the material…