How many judgments cite CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.?

2,267 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 142(1), Section 148, Section 143(3).

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

Issues it is cited on

section 25 india opportunity of being heard section 250 nfac interest total income document

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

M/S Vishaka Tradecom P Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-51(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed in limine

ITA 1650/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

…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. 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: ITA No.1650/Kol/2016 A.Y.2006-07 M/s Vishakha Tradecom P. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-1(4) Kol. Page 2 "if the party, at whose instance the reference i…

Sanskriti Sales Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT-3, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1473/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1473/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 271(1)(c)

…does not help a sleeping litigant. Hence, the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as un- 2 Sanskriti Sales (P) Ltd., AY 2010-11 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. 3. We, further, make it clear that if the assessee is advised to move appropriate application to recall this order, then he is at liberty to do so, for just cause and the Tribunal may decide in accordance to law. 4. In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order is pronoun…

Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-8, Kolkata

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

ITA 704/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 704/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Range-8, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aadcs 6121 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. Cit,Sr.Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. CIT,Sr.DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A No. 704/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd. -vs.- A.C.I.T., Range-8, Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AADCS 6121 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Nicolas Murmu, Addl. CIT,Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 02.01.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 02.01.2018. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 25.03.2015 of C.I.T.(A)-3, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2009-10. 2. This appeal was listed for hearing on…

M/S. Vegan Colloids Ltd., Bhiwani vs. CIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5818/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2008-09] M/S Vegan Colloids Ltd Vs. The C.I.T Railway Road, Siwani Hisar Distt. Bhiwani

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-DR

Section 253Section 282

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2008-09] M/s Vegan Colloids Ltd Vs. The C.I.T Railway Road, Siwani Hisar Distt. Bhiwani PAN : AABCP 4516 R [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 22.01.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2018 Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-DR ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.08.2014 of Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar and relates to assessment…

M/S Rosemount Merchants (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-4(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 903/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 903/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Rosemount Merchants (P) Ltd. -Vs.- I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Kolkata [Pan : Aadcr 8721 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Goutam Patra, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Hon’ble Sri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 903/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/s Rosemount Merchants (P) Ltd. -vs.- I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Kolkata [PAN : AADCR 8721 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Goutam Patra, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 01.01.2018 ORDER Per M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member: 1. This appeal arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-II, Kolkata [in short the ld CIT…

Debabrata Patnaik, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 440/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.S.Sainiआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.440/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Debabrata Patnaik, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Plot No.3660/4088, Bhubaneswar Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar Odisha-751002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aflpp 4434 P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bhagaban Panda, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.8.2017. 2. In Ground No.4 Of The Appeal, The Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Ex-Parte For Non-Prosecution. 3. At The Outset, Ld A.R. Of The Assessee Submitted That Cit(A) Dismissed The Assessee'S Appeal Ex Parte, For Non-Prosecution Qua The Assessee, Without Assigning Any Reason. According To Him, The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Being A Non-Speaking Order, Cannot Stand In The Eye Of Law. He Prayed That The Order Of Cit(A) May Be Set Aside With A Direction To Him To Decide The Grounds Of Appeal Taken Before Him, On Merit By Passing A Reasoned Order, After Hearing The Assessee. 4. Ld D.R. Supported The Order Of The Cit(A). 5. After Considering The Rival Submissions & Perusing The Order Of The Cit(A), We Find That The Cit(A) In His Order Has Observed That There

For Appellant: Shri Bhagaban Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

…sessee although various opportunities were given to the assessee to appear before him on 27.4.2017, 7.8.2017 & 23.8.2017 and hence, he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)Ltd., 38 ITD 320 and other judicial pronouncements. We find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. The order of the learned CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, the same is set aside and the matter is restored back to his file…

Prince Holdings (Madras) P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2361/CHNY/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2361/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. N. Devanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ruby George, CIT

…rits. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when an appeal is filed by the assessee, the CIT(Appeals) has no power to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution. The decision of Delhi Bench of this Tribunal in CIT v. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320, referred by the CIT(Appeals), is not applicable to the case of the assessee. The case of the assessee in Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. (supra) was an appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that since there was defect in filing the appeal, it has to be treated as not admitted or not taken on file. Such a procedure as 3…

Mr. Sumeet Bawa, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6713/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 6713/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sumeet Bawa, Vs Dcit, Bps House, M-161, Circle-3(1), Community Centre, Gulmohar New Delhi Enclave, New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepb2767P Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.12.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.12.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.08.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Vi, New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM ITA No. 6713/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Mr. Sumeet Bawa, Vs DCIT, BPS House, M-161, Circle-3(1), Community Centre, Gulmohar New Delhi Enclave, New Delhi-110049 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAEPB2767P Assessee by : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 28.12.2017 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 12.08.2014 of ld. CIT(A)-VI, New Delhi 2. Following g…

3M Electro and Communication India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. JCIT Puducherry Range, Puducherry

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

ITA 2286/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2286/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 3M Electro & Communication The Joint Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Concorde Block, Vs. Income Tax, Ub City 24, Vittal Mallya Road, Puducherry Range, Puducherry. Bengaluru 560 001. [Pan: Aaacp1896N] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Puducherry, Puducherry, Dated 19.06.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Posted For Hearing On 05.12.2017 By Service Of Notice [Rpad On Record]. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Petition Has Been Filed. Further, The Assessee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT

…b-head “Others”. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. 3. Therefore, having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. 4. Order pronounced on the 27th December, 2017 at Chennai. (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Date…

Shiva Distileries Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 111/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT

…has been filed. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeals. 3. Therefore, having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), the appeals of the assessee are dismissed for want of prosecution. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. 4. Order pronounced on the 27th December, 2017 at Chennai. (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chen…

Shiva Distileries Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 110/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT

Anil Hospitality Ventures Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2059/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 21/12/2017 एन.के. "ब"लैया महावीर "साद (लेखा सद"य) ("या"यक सद"य) ( MAHA…

Manoj Verma, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-58(1(, New Delhi

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

ITA 4902/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2007-08 Manoj Verma, Vs. Acit, C/O Ssar & Associates, Cas, Circle-58(1), 4852/24, 1St Floor, New Delhi. Near Sanjivan Hospital, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi. Pan: Ackpv2908A Assessee By : None Deptt. By : Shri Amit Jain, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: None

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2007-08 Manoj Verma, Vs. ACIT, C/o SSAR & Associates, CAs, Circle-58(1), 4852/24, 1st Floor, New Delhi. Near Sanjivan Hospital, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi. PAN: ACKPV2908A Assessee By : None Deptt. By : Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.12.2017 ORDER This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) on 11.05.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08. 2. When the matter was called up for hearing today, no o…

M/S. Shree Bihari Forgings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 6083/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.P. Jaina.Y. 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR

…of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of its Appeal. Page 1 of 2 4. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT 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 Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpo…

Force Computers (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 6026/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia.Y.: 2005-06

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

…of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of its Appeal. Page 1 of 3 4. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT 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 Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpo…

Smt. Bina C. Rohra L/H. of Late Chandru Dasumal Rohra, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, (Intl. Taxn. ), Baroda

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1741/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 19/12/2017 एन.के. "ब"लैया महावीर "साद (लेखा सद"य) ("या"यक सद"य) ( MAHA…

Lisa Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1711/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 19/12/2017 एन.के. "ब"लैया महावीर "साद (लेखा सद"य) ("या"यक सद"य) ( MAHA…

Shri Amit Sakalchand Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-9, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1570/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 19/12/2017 एन.के. "ब"लैया महावीर "साद (लेखा सद"य) ("या"यक सद"य) ( MAHA…

Shri Sakalchand Ramdas Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT (OSD), Circle-9, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1569/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR

…Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 19/12/2017 एन.के. "ब"लैया महावीर "साद (लेखा सद"य) ("या"यक सद"य) ( MAHA…

Sri Dibyendu Das, Kolkata vs. JCIT, RG-39, Kolkata

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

ITA 910/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am] I.T.A No.910/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Sri Dibyendu Das -Vs.- J.C.I.T, Range-39 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan :Adlpd3450H) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : U.Dasgupta, Addl.Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2017. Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: U.Dasgupta, Addl.CIT (DR)

…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.” 4. 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…