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 320Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1991#8 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.

2,267

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 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 250 Section 147 Section 144 Section 142(1)Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 25 india opportunity of being heard section 250 nfac interest total income document

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Jmj Mahila Mutually Aided Co-Op Thirft Development Credit & Marketing, Mahabubnagar vs. Income Tax Officers, Ward -2, Mahabubnagar

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

ITA 248/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Sri E.S. Ranganath, CAFor Respondent: Sri Y Sesha Srinivas,DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 44ASection 80P

…al. This view has been affirmed by Hon'ble ITAT Ahmedabad in case of Amitkumar H. Shah Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 2985/Ahd/2010 vide their order dated 31.12.2013, wherein following the order of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del), 1TAT has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of persuasion. Under these circumstances, the current appeal of the appellant is liable to be dismissed”. 4. Aggrieved with such orders of the CIT (A)/ NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeals: ITA No.248/Hyd/2022: “1. The Ord…

M/S. Sap Holdings & Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle-8(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions

ITA 2387/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Sap Holdings & Leasing Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, Circle 8(1)(2) 53, Datta Bhavan, V.M. Lane, Room No.625, Gokhale Road (North), Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Road, Vs. Dadar (West), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 028 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aafcs 7429 B Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jani, Ar Revenue By : Shri S. Anbuselvam, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2022

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jani, ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Anbuselvam, DR

Section 143(3)

…2019 passed by the ACIT, Circle 1(2), Mumbai (the learned Assessing Officer) under Section 143(3) of the Act, assessing the total income of assessee at ₹1,63,16,512/- was dismissed applying the decision of Delhi ITAT in case of CIT Vs. Multi plan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Delhi) as assessee did not respond to M/s. SAP holdings & leasing Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 17-18 four notices issued. Therefore, assessee aggrieved is in appeal before us. 02. The brief fact of the case shows that assessee is a company engaged in the business of sale and service of motor vehicle and spare parts. It filed its return of income on 30th Oct…

Bal Krishna Chauhan, Mau vs. ITO, Ward - 3(1), Azamgarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/VNS/2021[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi08 Jul 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2010-11 Bal Krishna Chauhan, V. Income Tax Officer, Mohammadabad Gohna Ward-3(1), Azamgarh Mohalla, Jamalpur Mau-276403 Pan-Akrpc5880F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.07.2022

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

Section 147Section 148

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 9. Thus, it is clear that the impugned order of the CIT(A) for not deciding the appeal on merit is contrary to provisions of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act and hence liable to…

Pratap Diagnostic Center, Azamgarh vs. ITO (TDS), Azamgarh

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

ITA 8/VNS/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 201Section 201(1)

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 8. Thus, it is clear that the CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits which is contrary to the provisions of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Further, the…

Pratap Diagnostic Center, Azamgarh vs. ITO (TDS), Azamgarh

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

ITA 7/VNS/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 201Section 201(1)

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 8. Thus, it is clear that the CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits which is contrary to the provisions of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Further, the…

Indra Narayan Tripathi, Gorakhpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 02, Gorakhpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 5/VNS/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Ashutosh BhardwajFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 253(3)Section 253(5)Section 52C(2)

…as no compliance by the assessee, the Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine without discussing the issue’s on merits, by relying on the decision of ITAT, Delhi Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT v., Multiplan India Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.), and also by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT reported in [1997] 223 ITR 480 [M.P.], vide appellate order dated 13.09.2019. 7. Aggrieved by appellate order passed by Learned CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal before tribunal. 7 ITA.No.05/VNS/2020 Sri I…

Amar Nath Yadav, Gorakhpur vs. ITO, Ward - 01 (01), Gorakhpur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA

ITA 13/VNS/2020[2016-2017]Status: HeardITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

…re was no compliance by the assessee and, therefore, the Learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order in limine without discussing the issues on merits,by relying on the decision of ITAT, Delhi Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT vs., Multiplan India Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in 4 ITA.No.13/VNS/2020 Shri Amar Nath Yadav, Gorakhpur. Assessment year 2016-17 the case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar v. CWT reported in [1997] 223 ITR 480 [M.P.]. 3. Aggrieved by appellate order passed by Learned CIT(A), the assessee has now filed second appeal before the tribuna…

Satish Kumar Srivastava, Kushinagar vs. ITO, Kushinagar

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

ITA 49/VNS/2020[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Jun 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2010-11 Satish Kumar Srivastava, V. Income Tax Officer, Bolchaha, Lalatola, Padrauna, Kushinagar, U.P. Kushinagar, U.P. Pan-Bgips1868P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri. Ashish Bansal, Adv Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Shri. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned fats and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, I have no reasons to interfere with the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The action of the Assessing Officer is upheld. Grounds of appeal are dismiss…

Mohd. Amaan, Gorakhpur vs. ITO, Ward - 2(3), Gorakhpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 162/VNS/2019[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Jun 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)

…ground itself. The embodies in well-known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENINUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in case of CIT Vs. Multiplan Indian ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble MP High Court in case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar Vs. CWT 91997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal to be dismissed. Accordingly, I have no reasons to interfere with the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The action of the Assessing Officer is upheld. Grounds of appeal are dismissed. 6. After…

Rajiv Naresh Godiwala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 25(3) (3), Mumbai

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

ITA 236/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Rajiv Naresh Godiawala Income Tax Officer Ward- 701, Laxmi Niwas, Ns Road No. 5, 25(3)(3), Juhu Scheme, Vileparle West, Vs. C-10/606, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400056. Complex, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacpg 5086 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Akash Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Akash Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 68

…'VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS SERVIUNT LEGES". Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del), the appeal is dismissed. 4.0 Without prejudice to the above, it is further stated that the records available have been perused including statements of facts and grounds of appeal and material on record. The material on record is not sufficient to allow any relief to the appellant. In view of the above, the appeal is decided on the basis o…

Pradeep Tripathi, Gorakhpur vs. ACIT, Circle - 02, Gorakhpur

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

ITA 86/VNS/2020[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi25 May 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2016-17 Pradeep Tripathi, V. Dy / Asstt. Commissioner Of Flat No. 207, Tower No. 8, Gemini Income Tax, Circle-2, Paradise, Medical Road, Gorakhpur, Gorakhpur, U.P. U.P. Pan-Acppt8095B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 56Section 80D

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 4. Though the CIT(A) has mentioned in the impugned order that various opportunities were granted to the assessee but there was no representation on behalf of the assessee. However,…

Manorma Srivastava, Gorakhpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(5), Gorakhpur

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

ITA 6/VNS/2020[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi25 May 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2010-11 Manorama Srivastava, V. Income Tax Officer, 724A, Anand Vihar Colony, Rapti Ward-1(5), Gorakhpur Nagar, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan-Byxps0213F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

…rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum “VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT”. In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.” 4. Thus, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is neither a speaking order nor passed on the merits of the appeal. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the impugned order of the CIT…

Shailesh Mani Tripathi, Gorakhpur vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Gorakhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 60/VNS/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi24 May 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Shailesh Mani Tripathi, Acit, Circle-1 384-E Infront Of Var- V. Gorakhpur, U.P. Vadhu Marriage House,Aarogyamandir, Shahpurrapti Nagar, Gorakhpur-273001, U.P. Pan:Aefpt 5272A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: ShriA.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80GSection 8O

…rights. This principle is embodied in well Known dictum "VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT". In view of the above mentioned facts and by placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Ltd reported in 38 ITD 320 and decision of Hon'ble MP High Court in case of Estate of Late TukojiRaoHolkar vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223 ITR 480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly I have no reasons to interfere with the penalty order passed by the AO. The action of the AO is upheld. Grounds of appeal are dismissed.” 6. Now ,aggrieved by the dismis…

Libra Finance Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 15(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 6783/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R

…I.T.A. No. 6783/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 6783/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Libra Finance Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, बनाम B-2, Bhargava Lane, Ward : 15 (3) Boulevard Road, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi – 110 054. PAN No. AAACL0360P अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे / Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department by : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R.; सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of hearing : 22/04/2022 उ"ोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement on : 20/05/2022 आदे…

Axis Spaces Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT14(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purpose, in the terms aforesaid

ITA 16/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman आअसं.16/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15) Axis Spaces Private Limited, Level 8 Centrum House, Vidyanarari Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai- 400 098. Pan: Aabct-7014-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit(Osd) Tds-1, Qureshi Mansion, Ground Floor, Teen Hath Naka, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Thane (West) – 400 602 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Mehul Jain सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/05/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ए ” "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. "रफौर रहमान, लेखा सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “ A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.16/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15) Axis Spaces Private Limited, Level 8 Centrum House, Vidyanarari Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai- 400 098. PAN: AABCT-7014-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. ACIT(OSD) TDS-1, Qureshi Mansion, Ground Floor, Teen Hath Naka, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Thane (West) – 400 602 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Bhupe…

Manan Hi Fashions Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(2), Noida

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

ITA 359/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) it is noticed that several opportunities were given to the assessee. On one of the occasions the ld. AR sought time. The ld. CIT (Appeals) referred to the decision of Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and since the assessee was not co-operating with the proceedings before him he dismissed the appeals ex- parte. It is noticed from the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee that assessee has challenged the re-opening of assessment stating that notice issued under Section 148 of the Act is bad in law and consequently the re-assessment mad…

Manan Hi Fashions Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(2), Noida

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

ITA 358/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Manan Hi Fashions Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(2), Noida

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

ITA 357/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Indra Mohan Gupta, Amroha vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Amroha

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

ITA 290/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R

Section 143(3)Section 148

…I.T.A. No. 290/Del/2020 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 290/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indra Mohan Gupta, Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/o. Swati Medical, Ward : 1 (4) Vs. Hall Bazar, Amroha, Amroha. Uttar Pradesh – 244 221. PAN No. ADRPG0698J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R.; 14/03/2022 सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 28/04/2022 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on : आदेश /O R D E R PER C…

Mohd Kausar, Amroha vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Amroha

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

ITA 289/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. RFor Respondent: 14/03/2022

Section 144Section 148

…peals) it is observed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) for non-prosecution. The appeal was dismissed ex- parte by the ld. CIT (Appeals) applying the decision of Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del). 4. The ld. CIT (Appeals) should have disposed of the appeal on merits rather than dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. Therefore, in the interest of justice this appeal is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (Appeals) who shall decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law, after providing adequate opportunity of being hear…