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 367,518 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 250Section 147Section 144Section 142(1)Section 148Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 25indiaopportunity of being heardsection 250nfacinteresttotal incomedocument

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Canary Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 6(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1725/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: M/s. Canary Tradecom Private LtdFor Respondent: The I.T.O, Ward 6(1)

…re was an adjournment application filed on behalf of assesse. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its case. 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 1 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 21-08-2018 P.M. Jagtap S.S.Viswanethra…

M/S A D Electrosteel Co. Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 854/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 M/S Ad Electrosteel Co. Dcit, Circle-1(1), बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., Baltikuri, 54/1, Rafi Ahmed V/S. Surkimil, Kalitala, Kidwai Road,Kolkata- Dasnagar, Howrah-711402 16 [Pan No.Aacca 1827 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 20-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 20-08-2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6 Kolkata’S Dated 03.11.2016, Passed In Case No.156/Cit(A)-6/Kol/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Today When The Case Was Called For Hearing None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Was Any Application For An Adjournment Filed By The Assessee In Spite Of Issue Of Notice By Rpad. It Appears That The Assessee Is Not Serious In Prosecuting This Appeal. Hence The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Non- Prosecution. For This View, We Find Support From The Following Decisions:- "1. In The Case Of Cit Vs B.N.Bhattacharjee & Another, Reported In 118 Itr 461 [Relevant Pages 477 & 478] Wherein Their Lordships Have Held That: "The Appeal Does Not Mean Merely Filing Of The Appeal But Effectively Pursuing It."

Section 144

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 M/s Ad Electrosteel Co. DCIT, Circle-1(1), बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., Baltikuri, 54/1, Rafi Ahmed V/s. Surkimil, Kalitala, Kidwai Road,Kolkata- Dasnagar, Howrah-711402 16 [PAN No.AACCA 1827 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 20-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 20-08-2018…

Smt. Jagdeep M.Shukla, Vadodara vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 916/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

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 Lalit P. Jain, 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…

Mr. Subhash Bhayana, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 562/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12

…ly inferred that the assessee is not serious in pursuing its appeal. In the circumstances, the only alternative left with us is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP). 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, as indicated above. Order is pronounced in the open court on 17th August, 2018. (Amit Shukla) Accountant Member Dated: 17th August, 2018 *aks* Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The…

Charmaine Kaula, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 5137/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishicharmaine Kaula, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Mohit Malhotra, Apartment Central Circle-1(1), No.-213, Dlf Park Place, Dlf Gurgaon City, Phase-V, Sector-54, Gurgaon Pan: Bcgpk5054F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Yadav, Sr. DR

…e reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, this court is not bound to answer the reference. (iii). In the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (del). The appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal which was fixed for hearing but on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue / applicant, nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why revenue choose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent pow…

Indo Holland Green Houses Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5120/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Sh. A.K. Yadav, Sr. DR

…see is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted. 3. Keeping in view the legal position that mere filing of appeal does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and also the Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Halkar vs. CWT (1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Imsofer Manufacturing India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the department’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5155/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N.K.Saini & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Respondent: Sh. Kumar Paranav, Sr. DR

…is apparent that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its appeal and, therefore, we have no option but to dismiss the assessee’s appeal for want of prosecution. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of the Hon’ble M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT reported in 223 ITR 480 (MP). 4. Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal stands dismissed. 5. Arguing for the department’s appeal, the Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) had erred in directing the AO/TPO to grant working capital adju…

Sh. Vijay Goel, Karnal vs. DCIT, Karnal

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed for non prosecution

ITA 743/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. L. P. Sahuvijay Goel Vs Dcit Director Of M/S. Goel Central Circle International Pvt. Ltd. Karnal Sonkra Road, Taraori (Respondent) Karnal Abmpk7955M (Appellant)

…ed. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested to prosecute this appeal. 2. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. [38 ITD 320 (Delhi)] and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT [223 ITR 480 (MP)], this appeal is treated as un-admitted and dismissed. 2 3. In result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 14th August , 2018. (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT…

Javerbhai Govindbhai Rabari, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1457/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meena, 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 13 - 08- 2018 (P. K.…

Infinite Civil Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 772/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, 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 13 - 08- 2018 (P. K.…

Cranberry Enterprises Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1547/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. Hangshing, CIT, DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Cranberry Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Kolkata 31/1H, Beadon Row, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 5th Floor, Kolkata – 700 006 Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECC 9649 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri G. Hangshing, CIT, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 13/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement: 13/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the…

Gopal Chandra Ghosh, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle - 23, Hooghly

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

ITA 1542/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Chowdhury, Addl. CIT

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Gopal Chandra Ghosh Vs. ACIT, CIR 23, Hooghly, C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, Aayakar Bhawan, G.T. Road, ‘SEBEN BROTHERS LODGE’, Khadina More, Chinsurah, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 105. Hooghly – 712 101. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AGDPG 0257 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri R. Chowdhury, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 13/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement: 13/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:…

Agemo Exim Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, Meerut

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

ITA 3389/DEL/2016[1999-2000]Status: HeardITAT Delhi13 Aug 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 1999-2000 M/S Agemo Exim Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of 82/1, Railway Road, Meerut City, Income-Tax, Circle -1, Uttar Pradesh Meerut. Pan: Aabca9965E

…t the assessee lost interest in this matter, and we are left with no option but to hold that the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. We find support from the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del) wherein there was no representation for the appellant in the appeal filed before the Tribunal on the date of hearing, nor any communication for adjournment was received as to why the appellant had chosen to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the assessee as unadmitted in view…

M/S. Grand View Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 4815/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Grand View Realtors P. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax Officer, 119, Vardhman Fortune Mall, 7Th Floor, Ward 12(2), Surya Kiran Building, New Delhi. G.T. Karnal Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccg2568C Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 13.08.2018 Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M.

…t the assessee lost interest in this matter, and we are left with no option but to hold that the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. We find support from the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del) wherein there was no representation for the appellant in the appeal filed before the Tribunal on the date of hearing, nor any communication for adjournment was received as to why the appellant had chosen to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the assessee as unadmitted in view…

M/S Narinder Kumar Khanna, Phagwara vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Indl. Taxation), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 596/CHANDI/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptamr.Narinder Kumar Khanna, Vs. The Director Of Income C/O Sh.G.P. Chadha, Main Tax (Intl. Taxation), Bazar, Hadiabad, Chandigarh. Phagwara. Pan: Bcwpk8266Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Alya, JCIT(DR)

…levant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that : “ The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” 4. Our view further finds support from the following decisions also :- i) CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) ii) Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. Respectfully following the decisions (supra), we dismiss the instant appeal filed by the assessee for non- prosecution. 6. Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in the eventuality the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on…

Hemant Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-42(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 2439/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri P. Maharishiassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs Hemant Kumar Ito F-82A, Mohan Garden, Peepal Road, Ward 42(5) Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. Anjpk7489B

…odied in well known dictum, “VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT’. Considering the facts 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), we treat this appeal as unadmitted. 5. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) wherein it has been held as under: 2 “if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparat…

Chand Singh Prop., Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Karnal

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

ITA 734/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathi, CIT(DR)

…odied in well known dictum, “VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUB VENIUNT’. Considering the facts 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), we treat this appeal as unadmitted. 4. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) wherein it has been held as under: “if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparatio…

M/S Radiant Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 588/JPR/2018[1989-90]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2018AY 1989-90
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT)

…r adjournment has been filed. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal. In these circumstances, following the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and also on the judgment of the Hon’ble 2 M/s. Radiant Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukhoji Rao Holkar vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (MP), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. 2. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 07/08/2…

Shri Partap Sharma, Faridabad vs. ITO, Faridabad

Appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution

ITA 4004/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar
Section 271(1)(c)

…ee is liable to be dismissed as unadmitted. 3. Keeping in view the legal position that mere filing of appeal does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and also the Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukoji Rao Halkar vs. CWT (1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putt…

Aristo Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1462/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1462/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Aristo Infracon Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito Ward-9(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aakca 1648 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2018 Order Per M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata [In Short The Ld Cita] In Appeal No. 1947/Cit(A)-3/W-9(1)/15-16 Dated 29.05.2017 Passed Against The Order Passed By The Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata [In Short The Ld. Ao] Under Section 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 31.08.2015 For The Asst Year 2012-13. 2. This Appeal Was Listed For Hearing On Several Occasions. On The Date Of Previous Hearing On 20.06.2018 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Case Was Adjourned To 06.08.2018 & The Notice Was Sent To The Assessee Through Rpad. On 06.08.2018 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & No Adjournment Petition Was Filed. It Means That Assessee Is Not Interested To Prosecute The Appeal. Hence The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Non Prosecution. For This View We Find Support From The Following Decisions :-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl. CIT
Section 271(1)(B)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1462/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Aristo Infracon Pvt. Ltd. -vs- ITO Ward-9(1), Kolkata [PAN: AAKCA 1648 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 06.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 06.08.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata [in short the ld CITA] in Appeal No. 1947/CI…