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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

M/S. Sati Trade Agency (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1)/Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed in limine

ITA 1509/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09 M/S Sati Trade Agency (P) V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ltd. 9/12, Lal Bazar Ward-5(1), Aayakar Street, Block-B, 3Rd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Room No.10, Kolkata Chowringhee Square, [Pan No. Aalcs 6824 L] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 09-02-2018 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 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 22.02.2016. 2. Today When The Matter Was Called On For Hearing, There Was No Response From The Side Of The Assessee Nor Filed Any Adjournment Application Filed By The Assessee Though Notice Of Hearing Was Sent To Assessee Through Rpad. It Was Also Observed That The Assessee Also Failed To Appear Before The Ld. Cit-A During The Appeal Late Proceedings. Therefore The Appeal Was Decided By The Ld. Cit-A Ex- Parte. From The Above, It Is Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Case Before Us As Well. 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.

…ssessee is not interested in pursuing its case before us as well. 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.1509/Kol/2016 A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Sati Trade Agency (P) 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 referenc…

Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The ITO, WD-5(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is dismissed, for non prosecution

ITA 1322/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The I.T.O, Wd-5(4), Kolkata 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-A, 3Rd P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccv 6475 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By : None Revenue By : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 08/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-2009, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata Dated 17.03.2016. 2. This Case Was Listed For Hearing Before The Tribunal On 08.02.2018 & For This Assessee Was Informed. Today I.E. On 08.02.2018 When The Case Was Called On Board, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Request For Adjournment Has Been Filed Before The Tribunal Despite The Service Of Notice Upon The Assessee. It Seems That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Prosecuting His Appeal; Hence, The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Liable To Be Dismissed, For Non-Prosecution. In Our Above View, We Find Support From The Following Decisions: 1. In The Case Of Cit Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & 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.” 2. In The Case Of Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. Cwt; 223 Itr 480 (M.P.) While Dismissing The Reference Made At The Instance Of The Assessee In Default Made Following Observation In Their Order: “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 Paper Books So As To Enable Hearing Of The Reference, The Court Is Not Bound To Answer The Reference.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Vidhi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The I.T.O, Wd-5(4), Kolkata 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-A, 3rd P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCV 6475 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Revenue by : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 08/02/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 08/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pert…