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 Lok Vikas Housing Funds Ltd.( Now Lok Vikas Housing Finance Corporation Ltd., Jaipur vs. The Addl.CIT Range-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 452/JPR/1999[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jan 2023AY 1995-96

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 254(1)Section 269DSection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…kas Housing Funds Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Jaipur This appeal was disposed of vide order passed on 7th 2. December, 2001 keeping in view of Rules 19 and 20 as well as the decision of Delhi Benches of Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Ltd. 38 ITD 320. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed as unadmitted. Thereafter, miscellaneous application was filed in 2008 and the miscellaneous application was numbered as No. 21/JP/2008. The said miscellaneous application was disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 15.02.2009. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter before the Hon’ble…

Raghawendra Pratap Singh, Varanasi vs. Dy. CIT, Circle - 02, Varanasi

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

ITA 96/VNS/2020[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi11 Jan 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Late Raghawendra Pratap Singh, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income L/H Geepta Singh (Wife), Tax, Circle-2, Varanasi C-53-54, Shivlok Tower, Lanka Varanasi-221005 Pan-Ahbps8614A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.01.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…tances, in my considered opinion, assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. As such I hold that this appeal is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard, we place reliance upon following case laws:- 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Hokar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) 4. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee And Another 118 ITR 461(SC) Therefore, considering the above factual and legal position, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed for non prosecution.” 5. Thus, it is manifest from the impug…

M/S. Vinayaka Realty (G) Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-1 (2) (5), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 108/RJT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

…e appellant. 4.3 It is held in various decisions that not only the appeal could be filed by the appellant it should also be pursued effectively for its prosecution. In this regard reliance is also placed on the following decisions- i. Multiplan Indian P Ltd., 38 ITD 320, ITAT Delhi, wherein it was observed : 4. A judicial body has certain inherent powers. Decisions are taken for the purpose of proper and expeditious disposal of the appeals in present climate of mounting arrears partly due to appeals being filed without proper application of mind to facts and law and also at times for altogether extraneous conside…

M/S. Hasham Investments & Trading Co Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1099/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sri B.K. Manjunath, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neea Malhotra, D.R

Section 234ASection 234DSection 250(6)Section 32Section 37(1)

…ITA No.1099/Bang/2022 Hasham Investment and Trading Company Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Hasham Investment and Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. 574, Next to Wipro Corporate Office Sarjapur Road ACIT Vs. Doddakannelli Circle-3(1)(2) Bangalore 560 035 Bangalore PAN NO : AABCH7520C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri B.K. Manjunath, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Neea Malhotra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 05.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 05.01.2023 O R D E R…

Shri Shwetal J. Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 493/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 254(2)Section 271(1)(c)

…t the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.). 3. Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order. 3.1. The Ld. D.R. further submitted tha…

Hari Kishan Babbar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-35(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2560/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2012-13 Hari Kishan Babbar, Vs. Ito, C2/986, Palam Vihar, Ward-35(4), Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana – 122017. Pan: Aaqpb8233Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Kavita Saini, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2022 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.08.2022 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That In This Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Impugned Order In Limine Applying The Decisions Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Bn Bhattacharya (1997) 118 Itr 461 (Sc) & The Decision Of The Itat Delhi In The Case Cit Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., Reported In 38 Itd 320 (Delhi). It Was Also Submitted That The Impugned Order Has Been Passed By The Ld.Cit(A) Ex Parte Qua The Assessee Without Giving Any Final Opportunity To The Assessee & Without Deciding The Grounds Taken By The Assessee On Merit As Per The Requirement Of Section 250 (6) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms Kavita Saini, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

…ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order in limine applying the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the ITAT Delhi in the case CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). It was also submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the ld.CIT(A) ex parte qua the assessee without giving any final opportunity to the assessee and without deciding the grounds taken by the assessee on merit as per the requirement of section 250 (6) of the Act. 3. The ld. Sr. DR, in all fairness, admitted that the ld.CIT(A)…

Shri Bhagwan, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward-3, Rewari

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

ITA 2603/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Bhagwan, Vs. Ito, Vpo-Saharanwas, Ward-3, Tehsil & Dist. Rewari, Rewari. Rewari, Haryana – 123401. Pan: Aqupb7507M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2022 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.03.2019 Of The Cit(A), Rohtak, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Has Been Filed. However, We Find This Matter Could Be Disposed Of Even In The Absence Of The Assessee. Therefore, We Proceed To Adjudicate This Appeal After Hearing The Ld. Sr. Dr. 3. On Perusal Of The Record, I Find That In This Case, The Ld. Ao Has Passed The Assessment Order Ex Parte In View Of Non-Appearance By The Assessee’S Representative. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Passed The Impugned Order In Limine Applying The Decisions Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Bn Bhattacharya (1997) 118 Itr 461 (Sc) & The Decision Of The Itat Delhi In The Case Cit Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., Reported In 38 Itd 320 (Delhi). I Also Find That The Impugned Order Has Been Passed By The Ld.Cit(A) Ex Parte Qua The Assessee Without Giving Any Final Opportunity To The Assessee & Without Deciding The Grounds Taken By The Assessee On Merit As Per The Requirement Of Section 250 (6) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

…IT(A) has also passed the impugned order in limine applying the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the ITAT Delhi in the case CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). I also find that the impugned order has been passed by the ld.CIT(A) ex parte qua the assessee without giving any final opportunity to the assessee and without deciding the grounds taken by the assessee on merit as per the requirement of section 250 (6) of the Act. 4. The ld. Sr. DR, in all fairness, admitted that the AO as well as the l…

Maggot Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 5617/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 5617/Del/2018 (A.Y 2012-13)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271Section 68

…as preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). After filing the appeal before the CIT(A), neither the assessee nor any representative of the assessee have appeared before the CIT (A). The Ld.CIT(A) by applying the ratio laid down in the case of Multiplan Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (ITAT Delhi) dismissed the appeal without deciding the issue on merit. 6. It is well settled law that the appeal before the CIT(A) cannot be dismissed without deciding the appeal on merit. In view of the same, we inclined to party allow the present appeal by restoring the issue involved in the present appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for de-novo c…

Dream Merchants Realtors (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Range-7, New Delhi

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

ITA 789/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N.K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2016-17 Dream Merchants Realtors Acit (P) Ltd. Vs Range-7 H-69, Outer Circle New Delhi Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aadcd9482F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…lly perused the order of the first appellate authority. We find force in the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee. The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee relying upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Private Limited 38 ITD 320. 4. In our considered opinion the first appellate authority ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we restore this appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal on merits of the case after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being…

Dsd Homes Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1103/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ggrieved by the assessment order dated 16/12/2018, the assessee has preferred the appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 10/01/2019 dismissed the appeal ex-parte by relying on the order of the Tribunal in CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. in 38 ITD 320 (Del). 5. Aggrieved by the order dated 10/01/2019, the assessee has preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 6. None appeared for the assessee, the notice sent by the registry to the registered address returned with an endorsement “Left”. Therefore, we are 3 DSD Homes P. Ltd., N. Delhi constrained to decide the appeal after…