CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Bhargabi Dealers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1954/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bhargabi Dealers Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………….........................Appellant 3, Saklat Place, Kolkata – 700 072. [Pan: Aaecb 9306 M] Ito, Ward 5(3), Kolkata...................…………………………………………................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 18, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 18, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 2, Kolkata Dated 29.09.2016. 2. In This Case, The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Was Initially Fixed For Hearing On 07.08.2018. None, However, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee On The Said Date & Hearing Therefore Was Adjourned To 18.09.2018 With The Direction To The Registry To Send The Notice Of The Said Hearing By Rpad To The Address Of The Assessee As Given In The Appeal Memo. On 18.09.2018, That Is Today, Nobody Again Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Application Seeking Adjournment Has Been Filed. It Is Noted That There Was A Similar Non- Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee Even Before The Ld. Cit(A) Resulting Into An Ex-Parte Passed By The Ld. Cit(A). It Appears From 2 I.T.A. No. 1954/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bhargabi Dealers Pvt. Ltd. This Conduct Of The Assessee That He Is Not Seriously Interested In Prosecuting This Appeal Filed Before The Tribunal.

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18th Sep…

Plamu Distributors Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata

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

…adjournment. Therefore, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its cases. In view of the above, following the decisions of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in 1 M/s. Plamu Distributors Pvt. Ltd. the case of Multiplan India (P) Limited reported in 38 ITD 320(Del) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT reported in (223 ITR 480(MP), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution. 3. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 12-09-2018 M. Balaganesh S.S.Viswanethra R…

M/S. Bluerose Barter Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 6(4), Kolkata

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Sri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1583/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Bluerose Barter Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- Ito, Ward-6(4), Kolkata [Pan : Aaecb 5998 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri M.Balaganesh, AM & Sri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1583/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s Bluerose Barter Pvt. Ltd. -vs.- ITO, Ward-6(4), Kolkata [PAN : AAECB 5998 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 10.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Kolkata [in short the ld CITA] in Appeal No.120/CIT(A)-…

Highview Markfab Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 13(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…eans effectively pursuing it and the law does not help a sleeping litigant. Hence, the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted. We, therefore, relying upon the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-appearance. 2 Highview Markfab Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 3. We, further, make it clear that if the assessee is advised to move appropriate application to recall this order, then it is at liberty to do so for just cause and the Tribunal may decide in accordance to law. 4. In the result, appeal of asse…

Sri Asesh Kumar Jana, Paschim Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Midnapur, Paschim Medinipur

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

…ing adjournment. Therefore, on going through record entries, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his cases. In view of the above, following the decisions of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India (P) Limited reported in 38 ITD 320(Del) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT reported in (223 ITR 480(MP), we dismiss the appeals of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution. 3. In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 10-09-2018 M. Balaganesh S.S.Viswanethr…

Morning Commotrade Private Limited, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 13(3), Kolkata

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

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravivs Morning Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., Ito, 104/1, Foreshore Road, Ground Ward-13(3), 110, Floor, Howrah-711102. Shanti Palli, Opposite Pan-Aagcm8723K Ruby Hospital, Kasba, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. D.A.J.Sawkmie, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 07.09.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.10.2016 Passed By Cit(A)-5, Kolkata For Ay 2012-013 Wherein He Confirmed The Additions Made By The Ao Ex-Parte.

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 07.09.201…

Goldenleap Agency Private Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-13(2), Kolkata, Kolkajta

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

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravivs Goldenleap Agency Pvt.Ltd., Ito, 34/35/2/1 Shree Arbinda Road, Ward-13(2), 110, Salkia, Howrah-711106. Shanti Palli, Opposite Pan-Aaecg9597F Ruby Hospital, Kasba, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. D.A.J.Sawkmie, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 07.09.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.10.2016 Passed By Cit(A)-5, Kolkata For Ay 2012-013 Wherein He Confirmed The Additions Made By The Ao Ex-Parte.

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 07.09.201…

Gurudev Suppliers Private Limited, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 13(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Gurudev Suppliers Pvt.Ltd., Ito, 128, Salkia School Road, Vs Ward-13(2), 110, Salkia, Howrah, Shanti Palli, Opposite West Bengal-711106. Ruby Hospital, Kasba, Pan-Aaecg1022F E.M.By-Pass, Kolkata, West Bengal-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Soumesh Dash, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 06.09.2018

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 06.09.201…

Leisure Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 13(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Leisure Suppliers Pvt.Ltd., Ito, 115, Shree Arvind Road, Vs Ward-13(2), 110, Golabari, Howrah, West Shanti Palli, Opposite Bengal-711106. Ruby Hospital, Kasba, Pan-Aabcl9422D E.M.By-Pass, Kolkata, West Bengal-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. D.A.J.Sawkmie, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 06.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 06.09.2018

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the open court on 06.09.201…

Naba Kumar Dutta, Burdwan vs. ACIT, Cir-1, Burdwan

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1264/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Naba Kumar Dutta..............................…………………………................................Appellant Bujrukdighi, Bajidpur, East Burdwan – 713 423 [Pan: Ahhpd 7263 L] Acit, Circle - 1, Burdwan...................…………………………………………................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Kachari Road, Burdwan – 713 101. Appearances By: None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.A.J. Sawkmie, Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 06, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 06, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – Burdwan Dated 30.03.2017. 2. At The Time Of Hearing Fixed In This Case Today, None Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Application Seeking Adjournment Has Been Filed. Even The Notice Of The Said Hearing Sent To The Assessee At The Address Given In The Appeal Memo Has Come Back Undelivered From The Postal Authority With The Remark “Not Known”. It Appears That The Assessee Has Not Even Bothered To Furnish A Correct & Complete Address In Order To Enable The Registry To Serve The Notice Of Hearing. This Casual Approach Of The Assessee Shows That He Is Not Seriously Interested In Prosecuting This Appeal Filed Before The Tribunal.

…This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 6th Sept…

Shashi Kanta Singh, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward 23(4), Hooghly

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Sri M.Balaganesh, Am,] I.T.A No. 771/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shashi Kanta Singh -Vs.- Ito, Ward-23(4), Hooghly [Pan : Cihps 4331 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S.Godara, JM & Sri M.Balaganesh, AM,] I.T.A No. 771/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shashi Kanta Singh -vs.- ITO, Ward-23(4), Hooghly [PAN : CIHPS 4331 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 05.09.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata [in short the ld CITA] in Appeal No.124/CIT(A)- 6/Kol…

M/S Swastic Financial & Commercial (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-3(1), Kolkata

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Sri M.Balaganesh, Am,] I.T.A No. 367/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Swastic Financial & Commercial Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- Dcit, Cc-3(1), Kolkata [Pan : Aaecs 0714 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S.Godara, JM & Sri M.Balaganesh, AM,] I.T.A No. 367/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/s Swastic Financial & Commercial Pvt. Ltd. -vs.- DCIT, CC-3(1), Kolkata [PAN : AAECS 0714 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 05.09.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata [in short the ld CITA] in Ap…