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 367,336 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.

Sh. Brij Mohan Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 4598/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…assing of the order gives various opportunities to the assessee. However, since ultimately the assessee did not appear, the appeal was dismissed. Reliance was placed upon the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del). The said procedure for deciding the appeal is not as per the statutory mandate as set out in sub-section (6) of Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961. I.T.A .No.-4598/Del/2016 Brij Mohan Gupta vs ITO Page 2 of 2 Considering the fact that the quantum appeal has been set aside to the file of the CIT(A) which also had been dismissed in limine b…

M/S. K.K. Spun Pipe (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4589/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singhi.T.A .No.-4589/Del/2016 (Assessment Year-2007-08) K.K.Spun Pipe P.Ltd., Vs Acit, 7/18A, Sarvpriya Vihar, Circle-5(1), New Delhi-110016. New Delhi. Pan-Aacck7334A (Appellant) (Respondent)

…al filed which has not been come back unserved. Accordingly, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. 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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (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. The said order was pronounced on the dat…

Vishwa Dharmayatan, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 4568/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singhi.T.A .No.-4568 & 4569/Del/2016 (Assessment Year-2007-08 & 2009-10) Vishwa Dharmayatan, Vs Dcit, C-18-19, Qutab Central Circle-20, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, Institutional Area, New Delhi-110016. Jhandewalan Extn., Pan-Aaatv0507B New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

…l/2016 each which remain not cured till date. Accordingly, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. 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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (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. The said order was pronounced on the dat…

Sh. Rajindra Pal Singh, Roorkee vs. ITO, Roorkee

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 2150/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt Diva Singhi.T.A .No.-2150 To 2152/Del/2016 (Assessment Year-2006-07 & 2008-09) Rajindra Pal Singh, Vs Ito, 437, Civil Lines, Roorkee. Ward-2, Pan-Acaps3033M Roorkee. (Appellant) (Respondent)

…umstances in the absence of any request for time till date, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. 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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (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. The said order was pronounced on the dat…

Amorn Narang, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 2481/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

…can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed 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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (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 I.T.A .No.-2481/Del/2015 Amorn Narang vs ITO Page 2 of 2 liberty if so advised to pray for a reca…

/S Filatech Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

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

ITA 5522/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2012-13 Filatech Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Unit No.19, 1St Floor, Ward-1(4), Augusta Point, Gurgaon. Gold Course Road, Gurgaon. Pan : Aaccn3164B

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 Filatech Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO, Unit No.19, 1st Floor, Ward-1(4), Augusta Point, Gurgaon. Gold Course Road, Gurgaon. PAN : AACCN3164B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: None Date of Hearing : 14.12.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 14.12.2016 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 08.09.2016 in relation to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. When the matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared…

Pramod Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 4462/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. JAIN, SR. DR

…considered opinion, no useful purpose would be served to send the notice again and again on the same address. 3. 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), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the Page 1 of 2 reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled fo…

Mr. Kapil Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 4422/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. JAIN, SR. DR

…considered opinion, no useful purpose would be served to send the notice again and again on the same address. 3. 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), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the Page 1 of 2 reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled fo…

Sh. Dharambir, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

ITA 4583/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2006-07 Dharambir, Dcit, Circle-1(1), S/O Shri Ram Chander, Gurgaon Vs. H. No.1383/31, Laxman Vihar, Phase- 1, Gurgaon. Pan : Arppd 9276 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri F. R. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 253

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-I”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dharambir, DCIT, Circle-1(1), S/o Shri Ram Chander, Gurgaon Vs. H. No.1383/31, Laxman Vihar, Phase- 1, Gurgaon. PAN : ARPPD 9276 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri F. R. Meena, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 06-12-2016 Date of pronouncement : 09-12-2016 O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 25.02.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Gurgaon, u/s 147/144 of the Incom…

Ma Kalyaneshari Educational Trust, Burdwan vs. C.I.T, Durgapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1977/KOL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

…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 December 07, 2016. (N.V…

Senior Media Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed for non-prosecution

ITA 3929/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

…d to send the notice again and again on the same address. 3. Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 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. 3. 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 pap…

Nirmal Kumar Budhia, Kolkata vs. The ITO, WD-44(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1229/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11 Nirmal Kumar Budhia V/S. Ito Ward-44(1) 154, J.L. Bjaj Street, 3, Govt Place Kolkata-700 007 Kolkta-700 001, [Pan No.Adjpb 0745 M] Ground Floor. .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)

…/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 Nirmal Kr. Budhia vs. ITO Wd-44(1) Kol. Page 2 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: "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…

Saanu International, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed for non prosecution

ITA 1715/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Smt Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-1715/Del/2014 (A.Y 2007-08)

…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. 3. In result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed for non prosecution. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05th December, 2016. (O.P. KANT) JUDICIAL MEMB…

Seetaramaiah Setty Chigarambatla, Raichur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1688/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George Ki.T.A No.1688/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) Shri. Seetaramaiah Setty Chigarambatla, Prop : C. Seetaramaiah & Co., Patel Road, 11-11-60, Bresthawarpet, Raichur 584 101 .. Appellant Pan : Adlpc9091R V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Raichur .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Smt. S. Praveena, Addl. Cit Heard On : 30.11.2016 Pronounced On : 30.11.2016 O R D E R Per George George K:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, Addl. CIT

…y was present on the date of hearing. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its case. We dismiss the appeal following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, as the appeal is infructuous for non- prosecution. 03. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 30th November, 2016. (GEORGE GEORGE K) JUDICIAL MEMBER MCN* Copy to: 1. The assessee 2. Th…

Samit Sarkar, Howrah vs. ACIT, Cir-26, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 965/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Amitabha Bhattacharya, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…of hearing or no communication has been made by the assessee in respect of his change of address. Hence, the appeal of assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution applying the decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320. 3. In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court. (S. S. Viswanethra Ravi) Accountant Member Dated : 29th November, 2016 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) 2 Samit Sarkar., AY 2009-10 Copy of the order forwarded to: APPELLANT – Shri Samit Sarkar, 10/01, Raju Kapalic Lane, Sandhya 1. Bazar, Howrah-711 101. Respondent –ACIT, Circ…

Malay Dolui, Haldia vs. ITO, Ward-27(1), Haldia.

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

ITA 1353/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Malay Dolui, Basudevpur, P.O KhanjanchakFor Respondent: The Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH KOLKATA Before : Shri M.Balaganesh, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 1353/KOL/2016 A.Y: 2009-10 Malay Dolui Vs. I.T.O Ward 27(1),Haldia PAN: AGMPD 0291Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the assessee/ Adj. Petition not filed Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR for the revenue Date of hearing : 29-11- 2016 Date of pronouncement : 29-11- 2016 O R D E R Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM :- This an appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the learned Commissioner o…

Sri. Ganeswar Kabadi Sundarsa, Bangalore vs. DCIT-Range-12(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 1512/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Saravanan B, Addl. CIT

…the totality of the facts, we are, thus, left with no option but to infer that that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, following the ratio of decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and considering the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Hon’ble High Courts in such a situation; we treat the appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the appeal in limine for want of prosecution of the case. The assessee is, however, at liberty to move the Tribunal showing out sufficient reason(s) and/or reasonable cause for failure to p…

Team Computers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3663/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Lalit Kumar, Jm Ita Nos. 3663 & 2160/Del/2013 : Asstt. Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Team Computers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax(A)- 1, Mohd. Pur, Xix, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact3478J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-19, New Delhi Dated 27.11.2012 & 21.01.2013 For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Lalit Kumar, JM ITA Nos. 3663 & 2160/Del/2013 : Asstt. Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Team Computers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Income Tax(A)- 1, Mohd. Pur, XIX, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACT3478J Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.11.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-19, New Delhi dated 27.11…

M/S. Apd Estates Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO-Ward-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 1794/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Saravanan B, Addl. CIT

…the totality of the facts, we are, thus, left with no option but to infer that that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, following the ratio of decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and considering the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Hon’ble High Courts in such a situation; we treat the appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the appeal in limine for want of prosecution of the case. The assessee is, however, at liberty to move the Tribunal showing out sufficient reason(s) and/or reasonable cause for failure to p…

Mr. Abdul Azeez, Bellary vs. ACIT-Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 1680/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Saravanan B, Addl. CIT

…the totality of the facts, we are, thus, left with no option but to infer that that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, following the ratio of decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and considering the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Hon’ble High Courts in such a situation; we treat the appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the appeal in limine for want of prosecution of the case. The assessee is, however, at liberty to move the Tribunal showing out sufficient reason(s) and/or reasonable cause for failure to p…