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 366,470 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.

Gen Singh, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with directions as above

ITA 408/JODH/2023[2017-189]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2017-189

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar Gehlot, Addl. CIT DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

…A). He argued that repeated opportunities were granted by both AO and Ld. CIT(A) via registered email, but the assessee chose not to comply. Therefore, the authorities were justified in drawing adverse inference. He relied on CIT v. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320 Del) and Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT (223 ITR 480 MP). 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused the record. The assessment was framed u/s 144 and the Ld. CIT(A) appeal was dismissed ex parte. The reasons recorded by Ld. CIT(A) primarily rest on non-compliance of notices. It is evident from the condonation paragraph itself that the assessee…

Pannalal Rampher Yadav, Silvasa vs. ITO, Silvassa

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

ITA 647/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

Section 250(6)Section 69A

…rt in CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Another [(1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC)], the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT [(1997) 223 ITR 480 (MP)], and the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in CIT v. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. [(1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del.)], and dismissed the appeal accordingly. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: 4. Several notices were issued giving opportunities of being heard to the appellant, which were duly served upon the appellant through registered email. No response is received till date. The particulars of notices issued are as under: Sr.…

Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore vs. ACIT., Circle - 1, Nellore

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

ITA 640/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad27 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.640/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2010-2011 Mr. Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore. The Acit, Circle-1, Pin – 524 004. Vs. Nellore. Pan Acvpg9050D Andhra Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca, A. Srinivas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.12.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A), Hyderabad- 11, Hyderabad, For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2

For Appellant: CA, A. SrinivasFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

…ils to appear at the hearing, or falls in taking steps for preparation of paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. Similar view has also been taken in the case of CIT v. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del). Following the ratio of Multiplan (India) Ltd (supra), the Chennai Tribunal has also dismissed appeal for non- prosecution in the case of M/s Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd v ITO in ITA No.134/Mds/2011 dated 5.7.2011 for A.Y.2006-07. It is pertinent to add here that the laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sle…

Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Limited, Bhopal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ACIT-2(1), Bhopal

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 172/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimadhya Pradesh Road Acit-2(1), बनाम/ Development Corporation Bhopal Vs. Ltd, 45-A, Arera Hiils, Bhopal (Pan:Aagcm5306C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vikas Guru, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Dr Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 80I

…M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT (1997) (223 ITR 480) (M.P.) dismissed the reference in def and for not taking necessary steps. Similar view has been taken I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)L(1991)(38 ITD 320). Considering the above, it appears that the appellant is not Page 4 of 10 Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Ltd ITA No.172/Ind/2025 - A.Y. 2012-13 interested in prosecuting his appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed for non- prosecution. 7.6 In view of the above, it appears that the non-appearance to notice…

Shri Vipan Gupta, Jammu vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central- Circl;E, Jammu

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

ITA 388/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…nterested in pursuing the appeal. During the appellate proceedings, no compliance has been made and no submissions have been filed despite repeated opportunities. In this regard, reliance is also placed on following case laws: (i) CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Hokar vs. cm 223 ITR 840 (M.P.) (iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&l-I) (iv) CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another 118 ITR 461 (SC). Since, the observations of the AO have not been rebutted by the appellant, therefore, the additions made by the AO are found sustainable and the various groun…

Jaswinder Singh, Ferozepur Cantt vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Ludhiana

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

ITA 587/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

…eated notices were issued to the assessee, yet there was no compliance. The conduct of the assessee showed that he was not interested in pursuing the appeal. The DR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd. v. CIT 38 ITD 320 (Del), the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee 118 ITR 461 (SC), to argue that mere filing of appeal does not amount to pursuing it. According to him, the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for wan…

Sukhminder Singh, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the order of the Ld

ITA 278/CHANDI/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singhla, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR (Virtual)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…espite repeated notices. The Ld. CIT(A) has recorded that as many as six opportunities were granted but no compliance was made. Thereafter, relying on decisions such as CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Another (118 ITR 461) (SC), CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del) and other judgments, the appeal was dismissed in limine on the ground of non-prosecution. Not only that, the Ld. CIT(A) has further gone into the merits of the addition and, on the basis of the working of bank balances, enhanced the addition from Rs.20,86,100/- to Rs.25,45,900/-. 8.1 In our considered view, such disposal of the appeal cann…

Manda Shantaram Garade, Talegaon Dabhade vs. Income Tax Officer 9(3), Akurdi

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

ITA 1343/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1343/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Manda Shantaram Garade, V The Assessing Officer, 66, Dhamane Gavthan, Near S Ward-9(3), Pune. Padmavati Mandir, Talegaon, Maharashtra – 410506. Pan: Bjcpg4762K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishit Gandhi(Virtual), Aadnya Bhandari(Present In Itat Pune Bench) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.03.2025 For The A.Y.2019-20 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

…dd, alter, amend, delete etc the above grounds of appeal in the interest of natural justice. 3.1 However, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee due to non-compliance following the decision of ITAT Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd 38 ITD 320 (Del). 4. As per Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, it was mandatory for ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee. In this case, there are legal grounds, which could have been adjudicated by ld.CIT(A) by calling the details from Assessing Officer. However, ld.CIT(A) has not bothered to adjudicate the Grounds. ITA No.1…

People Media Factory LLP, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle- 1(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 298/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, A SrinivasFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr. AR

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…it’s claim, the learned CIT(A) respectfully following decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., BN Bhattacharjee and another 10 CTR 354 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee firm for non-prosecution. 6 ITA.No.298/Hyd./2025 5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee firm is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. CA, A. Srinivas, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, before the Assessing Officer the assessee firm has furnished relevant infor…

Mb Akkaiah and Company, Miryalguda vs. ACIT., Circle-7(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1133/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…dences to substantiate it’s case and by following the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., BN Bhattacharjee and another 10 CTR 354 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee firm for non- prosecution. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any petition seeking for adjournment. We, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal on merits, after hearing the Learned…

Mr. Vijaykumar Pramanad Sethi, Jalna vs. ITO Ward 1, Jalna

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

ITA 464/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

…A)/ NFAC. The appellate order reveals that the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has applied the decision of in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattarcharjee and Another, 10 CTR 354 (SC), Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CIT, 223 ITR 480 (MP), CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. No doubt, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC may decide the appeal ex-parte where the assessee does not prosecute his appeal in spite of several opportunities. None-the- less, he has to adhere to the legislative mandate enshrined in sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act which requires h…

Rajasthan State Health Assurance Agency, Jaipur vs. It Ward -1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 808/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Rajvanshi,CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

…appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of appeal paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. Similar view has also been taken in the case of CIT v. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del). Following the ratio of Multiplan (India) Ltd 3 RAJASTHAN STATE HEALTH ASSURANCE AGENCY VS ITO, WARD 1(1), JAIPUR (supra), the Chennai Tribunal has also dismissed appeal for non-prosecution in the case of M/s Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd v ITO in ITA No.134/Mds./2011 dated 5.7.2011 for A.Y.2006-07. It is pertinent to add…

Nirmala, Salem vs. Income Tax Officer, Salem

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

ITA 1774/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1774/ Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Arokiya Sathish, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 147

…appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee did not respond to four notices issued. While dismissing the appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relied upon the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [38 ITD 320 (Del.)], without adjudicating the issues raised on merits. 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R.) of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was further submitted that Ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merit , one more opportunity may be g…

Shubham Yadav L/H Vijay Pal Yadav, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(4), Meerut

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

ITA 1076/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.1075 & 1076/Del/2025, A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2017-18 Shubham Yadav Income Tax Officer, L/H Of Vijay Pal Yadav, Ward-2(4), 145, B.C. Lines, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Meerut- 250001 Bhainsali Ground, Meerut, Pan: Aaapy8828J Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Raj Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Gouranga Chandra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…nciple is embodied in well-known dictum, "vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt Considering the facts and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules in the case of CIT V. Multiplan India (P) Uld [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Delhi), the appeal was treated as unadmitted. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 wherein it has been held as under (headnote) "If the party, at whose instance the reference is made fails to appear at the hearing or fails in taking steps for…

Shubham Yadav L/H of Vijay Pal Yadav, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Meerut

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

ITA 1075/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Section 144Section 147Section 148

Brijlaxmi Paper Products Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 854/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 854/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Brijlaxmi Paper Products Pvt. Limited,……..Appellant 686, Shrachi Tower, Anandapur Em Byepass, Kolkata-700107 [Pan:Aafcb2003G] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,….....Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…and the case of New India Assurance -vs.- Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242 as well as Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Nirmal Singh & Others (Cr No. 3791 of 2013 (O & M) dated 01.05.2014. Likewise, in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del) similar view had been taken. The ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, convinced that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal and, therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted. 4 Brijlaxmi Paper Products Pvt. Limited 8. Now the question before us is imposition of penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of…

Brijlaxmi Paper Products Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 853/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 853/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Brijlaxmi Paper Products Pvt. Limited,……..Appellant 686, Shrachi Tower, Anandapur Em Byepass, Kolkata-700107 [Pan:Aafcb2003G] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,….....Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 270A

…and the case of New India Assurance -vs.- Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242 as well as Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Nirmal Singh & Others (Cr No. 3791 of 2013 (O & M) dated 01.05.2014. Likewise, in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del) similar view had been taken. The ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, convinced that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal and, therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted. 8. Now the question before us is imposition of penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income was justified or not? No penalty c…

Krishnamurthy Rangappa, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 1308/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2018-19 Krishnamurthy Rangappa, Income Tax Officer, 2, Manjunatha Nilaya, Ward-4(1)(1), Little Flower Hospital, R.M. Nagar, Bangalore. Vs. Bangalore-560016. Pan No : Agppr2719C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Pranav Krishna – Advocate Respondent By : Sri Balusamy N - Jcit Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: This Appeal Filed By Krishnamurthy Rangappa Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Nfac) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) For Asst Year 2018-19 On 18/03/2025 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 09/04/2021 Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Sri Pranav Krishna – AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N - JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250

…used the records. It is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee before him. The Ld. CIT(A) has merely dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). Page 4 of 5 Krishnamurthy Rangappa vs. ITO 6. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (Central) v/s Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bom.), wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held as under:– “8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing o…

Boppana Ashok Kumar, Gannavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Vijayawada

ITA 392/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…n the appointed date. Mere filing of an appeal is not enough, rather it 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). 4.2 The 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 D…

Shilpaa Electrical Infra Tech India Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 934/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.934/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Shilpa Electrical Infra Vs. Acit Tech India Limited Central Circle 3(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aalcs7808Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Vinod, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Sv Siva Prasad, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10/03/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Hyderabad-11, For The A.Y.2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri SV Siva Prasad, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 143(2)

…ITA No 934 of 2025 Shilpa Electrical Infra Tech India Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ DB-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.934/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/s Shilpa Electrical Infra Vs. ACIT Tech India Limited Central Circle 3(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AALCS7808Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri P. Vinod, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Shri SV Siva Prasad, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 13/08/2025 घोषणा की त…