CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Tammana Viswanadha Rao, Bhimavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

…26/- and the same is added to the total income of the assessee. 3. On being aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, he has not appeared. The ld.CIT(A) by applying ratio laid down in CIT Vs. Multipal (India) Pvt. Ltd. [(38 ITD 320)(Del.)], dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee has submitted that the notice issued by the ld. CIT(A) has not received by the assessee and therefore he prevented to appear before him. 6. On the other…

Tammana Viswanadha Rao, Bhimavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

…26/- and the same is added to the total income of the assessee. 3. On being aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, he has not appeared. The ld.CIT(A) by applying ratio laid down in CIT Vs. Multipal (India) Pvt. Ltd. [(38 ITD 320)(Del.)], dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee has submitted that the notice issued by the ld. CIT(A) has not received by the assessee and therefore he prevented to appear before him. 6. On the other…

Laxmi Devi Mohata, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2)(3), Surat

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

…ITR 461); Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) (MP); The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s.Chemipol V/s. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009; Late Tukojirao Holkar (MP), 223 ITR 480. and CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del)etc., the appeal was dismissed. 3. The ld.AR inviting attention to the early hearing application which has been adjudicated upon in his favour submitted that the assessee sought adjournment before the CIT(A) on account of the fact that the assessee’s accountant had left the job and also there was change in the Chartered Accountant appointed…

Nitesh Bhagchand Jain, Surat vs. ACIT, Cir.-1(2), Surat

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

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.449/Srt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nitesh Bhagchand Jain, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Lower Ground, M.R.House, Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kohinoor Textile Market, Surat. Ring Road, Surat. [Pan: Aaxpj 5234 G] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ramesh Malpani – Ca िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri P.S.Choudhary – Sr.Dr

…ITR 461); Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) (MP); The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s.Chemipol V/s. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009; Late Tukojirao Holkar (MP), 223 ITR 480. and CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del)etc., dismissed the appeal holding as under : 5.1.5. Respectfully, following these judicial pronouncements (supra), the appeal filed by the appellant is treated as dismissed for non-prosecution. On merit also, the appellant has failed to furnish any corroborative evidence of his claim. In view of the above, on merits also appeal deserves to…

Smt. Hafisa A. Khalique Kothiwala Legal Heir of Abdulkhalique G. Kothiwala, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.2939/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Hafisa A.Khalique Kothiwala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Legal Heirs Of Abdulkhalique Ward-3, Bharuch – 392 001. G.Khothiwala) Tansim & Associates, Chartered Accountants, 206, 2Nd Floor, B.G.Trade Centre, Above P.D.Shroff Office, Panchbatti, Bharuch – 392 001. [Pan: Afqpk 2971 M] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri P.S.Choudhary – Sr.Dr राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 11.01.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 11.01.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Diva Singh, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Assailing The 1. Correctness Of The Order Dated 07.07.2015 Of Cit(A)-3, Vadodara Pertaining 2010-11 Assessment Year On Various Grounds. However, At The Time Of Hearing No One Was Present On Above Of The Assessee. The Appeal Was Passed Over Twice, Despite This The Assessee Remained Unpresented. The Record Shows That The Appeal Was Adjourned. On The Written Request Of The Assessee On 07.12.2018 In The Presence Of The Parties, Accordingly Since The Assessee Despite Being Aware Of The Chosen To Remain Unpresented. Considering The Fact That On Each Of The Occasions The Appeal Come 2. For Hearing I.E. 24.05.2018, 11.07.2018 & 07.12.2018 The Assessee Sought Adjournments. In These Circumstances, It Cannot Be Presumed That The Assessee May Not Be Seriously Pursuing The Appeal By The Appeal Is Dismissed.

…Smt.Hafisa A.Khalique Kothiwala Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Bharuch/ITA No.2939/AHD/2015/A.Y.2010-11 Page 1 of 2 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT "ीमती िदवा िसंह, "ाियक सद" तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.2939/AHD/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Hafisa A.Khalique Kothiwala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Legal heirs of Abdulkhalique Ward-3, Bharuch – 392 001. G.Khothiwala) Tansim & Associates, Chartered Accountants, 206, 2nd Floor, B.G.Trade Centre, Above…