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.

M/S.Argine Jewels, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1), Surat

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

ITA 165/SRT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.165/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Argine Jewels, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Surat. C/O.Piyush Dhanjibhai Saspara, . 119, Mamta Park Society, Vibhag-2, Spinning Mill Road, Nr. Kapodara Police Station, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aapfa 6045 E] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – A.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri Sreenivas T.Bidari – Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 10.12.2019 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 11.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Surat Dated 28.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Being Aggrieved By The Order Ld.Cit(A) In Upholding The Order Of The Ld.Assessing Officer In Disallowing The Deduction U/S.10Aa Of The Act.

Section 10A

…we noticed that the present appeal was decided by the ld.CIT(A) ex-parte and while applying Page 2 of 3 Argine Jewels Vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Surat /ITA No.165/SRT/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14 the principles laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del). 4. During the hearing, ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case, which is contrary to the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the ld.Counsel requested that the impugned order may be cancelled and the issues in…

Paresh Jayantibhai Parekh, Mehmadabad vs. ITO, Ward-4, Nadiad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 1422/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1422 & 1423/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.D.R

Section 144

…we decline to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, the only alternative left is to dismiss both the appeals 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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). ITA Nos.1422 & 1423/Ahd/18 [Paresh J. Parekh vs. ITO] A.YS. 2009-10 & 2010-11 - 3 - 4. Before parting, it would be appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there existed a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at…

Roselabs Bioscience Limited, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 467/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: 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.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

…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. 4. In the result, the appeal of the A…

M/S. Fayaj Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 281/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Patnaik, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CIT DR

…for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. At the time of hearing, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has passed order qua the assessee despite time petition dated 27.4.2018 applying the decision of ITAT Delhi in the case of Multiplan India Pvt Ltd.,38 ITD 320(Del) without adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised in Form No.35. Hence, it was his prayer to restore the matter back to his file to for fresh adjudication after allowing hearing to the assessee. P a g e 1 | 3 ITA No.281/CT K/2018 Asse ssment Year : 20 14- 15 3. Replying to above, ld CIT DR opposed to restoring the matter again to the fi…

Shri Hasmukhbhai Tekchand Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Addl. CIT, Range-2(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 198/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

…sessee though the notice fixing the date of hearing was served on Assessee, which indicates that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal, therefore, following the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. The assessee shall however be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recalling of this order, if prevented by sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing. 3. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 04- 12- 2019 (AMARJIT…

Smt. Gunvantiben Hasmukhlal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-5(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1148/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Section 271E

…the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeals 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. 4. In the result, both the appeals of…

Anupam Infrastructure, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 528/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.528/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Anupam Infrastructure, V The Income Tax Officer, R.S.No.56/1, F.P.No.143, Tp No.-1, S Ward-2(3)(1), Surat – 395007. Near Someshwara Enclave, Vesu, . Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aarfa 1189 P] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay – Adv. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2019 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 02.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Surat Dated 31.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. On The Grounds Mentioned At The Very Outset, We Noticed That The Present Appeal Was Decided By The Ld.Cit(A) Ex-Parte & While Applying The Principles Laid Down In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 Itd 320 (Del).

…d 31.08.2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. On the grounds mentioned at the very outset, we noticed that the present appeal was decided by the ld.CIT(A) ex-parte and while applying the principles laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del). Anupam Infrastructure Vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(1), Surat /ITA No.528/SRT/2019 for A.Y. 2014-15 Page 2 of 4 3. During the hearing, ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case, which is contrary to the principle of natural j…

Shri Yashpalsinh Banesinh Zala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-3(2)(3), Surat

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

ITA 349/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.349/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Yashpalsinh Banesinh Zala, V The Income Tax Officer, 47, Bhuvaneshwari Housing Soc., S Ward-3(2)(3), Surat. Dabholi Road, Dabholi, Surat – . 395 004. [Pan: Aahpz 6936 B] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Nishit Shah – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2019 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 02.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Surat Dated 15.02.2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. On The Grounds Mentioned At The Very Outset, We Noticed That The Present Appeal Was Decided By The Ld.Cit(A) Ex-Parte & While Applying The Principles Laid Down In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 Itd 320 (Del).

…d 15.02.2019 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. On the grounds mentioned at the very outset, we noticed that the present appeal was decided by the ld.CIT(A) ex-parte and while applying the principles laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del). Shri Yashpalsinh Banesinh Zala Vs. ITO, Ward-3(2)(2), Surat /ITA No.349/SRT/2019 for A.Y. 2010-11 Page 2 of 4 3. During the hearing, ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case, which is contrary to the principle of…

M/S Kishor Project Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Dy. Commr. Income Tax, Circle-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 528/RJT/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

…CIT A.Y. 2007-08 Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, since it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non-appearance. Hence the a…

M/S. Vinayak Corporation, Arvali vs. DCIT, S.K.Circle, Himatnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 752/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, since it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non-appearance. Hence the a…

M/S Rotex Enterprises Private Limited, Vadodara vs. ITO, Ward--2(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 193/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. K. Goel, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

…t for, hence, it appears that the assessee is not interested to proceed with the matter. In this aspect, relying on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Rotex Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Year –2014-15 the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. We are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. This appeal is dismissed. 3. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/11/2019 (WASEEM AHMED) (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 29/11/2019 TANMAY, Sr. PSआदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/C…

Shri. Narayana Gundappa, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1554/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai, Judical Member

For Appellant: Smt. Mrinalini, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. P.Renugadevi, JCIT

…avit as well as submitted by Ld.AR does not bring out clearly hard pressed situation of assessee. However, in our opinion, no party could be denied right of being heard. As Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by applying CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt.Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320, without deciding the issue on merits, the issue deserves to be set-aside to Ld.CIT (A). 3.1 We therefore, condone delay of 82 days in filing present appeal, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- to Karnataka Chief Ministers relief fund. Ld.CIT(A) shall fix date of hearing, only upon production of receipt along with affidavit of payment having actuall…

M/S Prosim Research and Development Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-5(1)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1314/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT

Section 195Section 40

…assessee’s failure to deduct tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act. The assessee went on appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte following the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320. Against which, the assessee filed appeal before us. 3. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. In the instance case, the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte following the decision of Multiplan India Ltd., supra and the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the merits while disposing the appeal. As per the provisions…

Shri Rajendra Jibhai Barot, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-13(3)., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1160/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Laxman Singh Gurjar

Section 144

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for the recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non- appearance.…

Shri Rajendra Jibhai Barot, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-13(3)., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1159/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: --None--For Respondent: Shri Laxman Singh Gurjar

Section 144

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for the recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non- appearance.…

Saravanan Komala Valli, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 11 (3), Chennai

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

ITA 2692/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2692/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Smt. Sarvanan Komala Valli, The Income Tax Officer, Old No. 102, New No. 70, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 11(3), Shanmugarayan Street, Chennai 600 006. Near Stanley Hospital, George Town, Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Bokpk9164G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. Shri Guru Bashyam, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai, Dated 28.05.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. Besides Challenging Various Issues On Merits, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

…e, there was no response from the assessee after receipt of hearing notice, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order. Except reproducing the grounds raised by the assessee, by referring to the decision in the case of CIT v. Multiplan (India) Private Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del), which was followed in the case of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. v. ITO in ITA No. 134/Mds/2011 dated 05.07.2011, the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issues on merits in the absence of any supporting materials or evidences. 6. Vide order dated 16.04.2018 in W.P. No. 8126 of 2018 in the case of N.S. Mohan v. ITAT, wherei…

Shyam Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 921/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

Ratilal Dahyalal Patel, Kalol vs. ITO, Ward-(4), Mehsana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 901/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

Hetal Gauravbhai Viradia, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Wrad-1(2), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 231/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarajit Singh)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. K. Goel, Sr. D.R

Vishwanath, Siddharthnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Siddharthnagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 281/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Vishwnath V. Income Tax Officer Sakarpar, Bansi Siddharthnagar Siddharthnagar Tan/Pan:Aevpv6197G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21 11 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 11 2019 O R D E R

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

Section 263

…aring, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. As such, we hold that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non- prosecution. In this regard, we place reliance upon the following case laws:- 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) ITA No.281/ALLD/2018 Page 2 of 2 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) 3. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- p…