CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

J. K. Sons & Co., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 44, Kolkata

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

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2063/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. J.K. Sons & Co.…………………………………………………………….…….……......Appellant 1, Mullick Street (Bara Bazar), Kolkata – 700 007 [Pan :Aadfj 3159 L] D.C.I.T Circle 44 Kolkata………...……………………..……..............................Respondent 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata – 700 001 Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.C. Mondal, Addl. Cit, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 13, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 2Nd ,2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

…e, 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, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” 3. In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) 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/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent po…

M/S Dynametic Overseas (P) Ltd.(Formerly Known As R.Piyarelall International(P) Ltd.), Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT Range 8, 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. 2391/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Dynametic Overseas (P) Ltd. -Vs.- Acit, Range-8, Kolkata (Formerly Known As M/S R. Piyarilall International Pvt. Ltd.) [Pan : Aabcr 3157 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S. Godara, JM & Sri M.Balaganesh, AM,] I.T.A No. 2391/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s Dynametic Overseas (P) Ltd. -vs.- ACIT, Range-8, Kolkata (formerly known as M/s R. Piyarilall International Pvt. Ltd.) [PAN : AABCR 3157 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 02.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 02.05.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal…

Samvritah Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

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

Bench: The Cit-A The Assessee Sought Adjournments On 21-07-2016, 24-08-2016, 22-09-2016, 26-10-2016 & 22-12-2016 & As Such The Case Of Assessee Was Adjourned From Time To Time. According To Cit-A, On Such Date Of Hearings Neither Any One Appeared

…AO regarding the additions made U/Sec. 68 & 14 A of the Act. 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 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 25-04-2018 Arjun Lal Saini S.S.Viswanethra…

Joyful Tie-Up Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 6(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Joyful Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Kolkata 23A N.S. Road, 1St Floor, Kolkata – 1. Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccj 7267 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

…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, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” (3). In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) 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/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent po…

M/S Honesty Goods Trader Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-9, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2011-12 M/S Honesty Goods Trader Dcit, Circle-9, बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., 42, Hariram P-7, Chowringhee V/S. Goenka Street, 1St Floor, Square, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-007 [Pan No.Aacch 5757 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 25-04-2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 20.12.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…nferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case. 3. Considering the facts of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. ITA No.496/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 M/s Honesty Goods Trader Pvt, Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-9 Kol. Page 2 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the refere…

Parijat Agency Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Parijat Agency Pvt Ltd., Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Arun Jain & Ward-5(2), P-7, V/S. Associates, 2B, Grant Lane, Chowringhee Square, 2Nd Floor, Rom No.74, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-700 012 [Pan No.Aaecp 9476 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 25-04-2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & Keeping In View The Provisions Of Rule 19(2) Of The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules As Were Considered In The Case Of

…acts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of ITA No.493/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Parijat Agency Pvt, Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-5(2) Kol. Page 2 CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has 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 preparation of the pape…

Tata Korf Engineering Services Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:1999-20 Tata Korf Engineering Acit, Circle-2(2), बनाम / Services Ltd., Tata Centre, P-7, Chowringhee V/S. 43, Chowringhee Road, Square, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-71 [Pan No.Aabct 1387 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 25-04-2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 1999-00 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata Dated 11.04.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…nferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case. 3. Considering the facts of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. ITA No.1623/Kol/2016 A.Y. 1999-00 Tata Korf Engineering Services . Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Cir-2(2) Kol. Page 2 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the…

M/S Ishwar Vinimay Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Kolkata

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

…ssessee on this day i.e. 24-04-2018 fixed by the registry. It 1 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 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 24-04-2018 Arjun Lal Saini S.S.Viswaneth…

M/S. Ranbhumi Financial Consultant Pvt. Ltd, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 13(3), Kolkata

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

Bench: The Cit-A The Assessee Sought Adjournment On 01- 06-2016 & The Case Was Adjourned To 22-06-2016. According To Cit- A, Neither Any One Appeared Nor Any Application Seeking Adjournment Filed On Behalf Of Assessee. We Find No Representation By The Assessee

…AO regarding the additions made U/Sec. 68 & 14 A of the Act. 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 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 24-04-2018 Arjun Lal Saini S.S.Viswanethra…

Skm Housing Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 13(4), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Skm Housing Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-13(4), Kolkata 110, Shantipally, 9Th Fllor, 265, G.T. Road, Liluah, Howrah – 711204. R.No.906, Em Bye Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aalcs 5833 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By : None Revenue By : Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-2013, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata Dated 02.01.2017. 2. Notice Of Hearing Of This Appeal Was Sent To The Assessee At The Address Given By The Assessee In Form No.36. The Said Notice Has Not Been Returned Unserved. This Appeal Was Listed For Hearing Before The Tribunal On 24.04.2018. Today I.E. On 24.04.2018 When The Case Was Called For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Request For Adjournment Was Made. It Means That Assessee Is Not Interested 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.Bhattachrgee & 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.”

…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, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” (3). In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) 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/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent po…

Sri Siddhartha Nag, Kolkata vs. ACIT Circle 50, Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Sri Siddhartha Nag Vs. Acit, Cir-50, Kolkata Ba-114, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Uttarapan, Manicktala Civic Kolkata – 700 064. Centre, Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 054. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abqpn 1709 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

…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, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” (3). In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) 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/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent po…

Smt. Santosh Devi Sharma, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 47(2), Kolkata

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

…1 hearing by the CIT-A are available at page-2 of his order. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting her 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 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 09-04-2018 P.M. Jagtap S.S.Viswanethra Rav…

One Ad Display Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

…s 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 Holkar –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. Order pronounced in the open Court on April 09, 2018. (S.S. V…

Shivputra Vinimay Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO (Tech-2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Shivputra Vinimay Pvt. Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Ltd. C/O Arun Jain & (Tech-2), P-7, V/S. Associates 2B, Grant Lane, Chowringhee Square, 2Nd Floor, Room No.74, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-12 [Pan No.Aaqcs 0935 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G.Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…nferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case. 3. Considering the facts of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. ITA No.492/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Shivputra Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (Tech-2) Kol. Page 2 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the reference is…

Starrise Suppliers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Starrise Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Arun Jain & Associates Ward-5(1), P-7, V/S. 2B, Grant Lane, 2Nd Floor, Chowringhee Square, Room No.74, Kolkata-12 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaqcs 0935 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G.Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…nferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case. 3. Considering the facts of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. ITA No.491/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Starrise Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-5(1) Kol. Page 2 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the reference is…

Subhankar Vintrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Subhankar Vintrade Pvt. Income Tax Officer, बनाम Ltd. C/O Arun Jain & Ward-5(1), P-7, / V/S. Associates 2B, Grant Chowringhee Square, Lane, 2Nd Floor, Room Kolkata-69 No.74, Kolkata-12 [Pan No.Aapcs 4085 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G.Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-04-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit(A) Despite The Notices For Hearing Were Issued Upon The Assessee. Therefore The Ld. Cit(A) Passed The Ex-Parte Order. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

…nferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case. 3. Considering the facts of the case 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), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. ITA No.487/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Subhankar Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-5(1) Kol. Page 2 4. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the reference is…