CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

Sh. Sanjay Verma, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 3628/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sanjay Verma, Vs Income Tax Officer, 69, Dda Flats, 1St Floor, Jwala Heri, Ward-27(1), Pashim Vihar, New Delhi-110063 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acxpv5450A Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2016 Order

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 3628/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sanjay Verma, Vs Income Tax Officer, 69, DDA Flats, 1st Floor, Jwala Heri, Ward-27(1), Pashim Vihar, New Delhi-110063 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ACXPV5450A Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 29.08.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 03.02.2014 of ld. CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi. 2. Earlier this case was fixed for hearing on 30.06.201…

Sh. Muddasir Nazar, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 3515/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sh. Muddasir Nazar, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-274, Kabutar Market, Welcome Ward-34(3), Colony, New Seelampur-Iv, New Delhi Delhi-110053 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adypn0645H Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. K. Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.12.2013 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvii, New Delhi. 2. Earlier This Case Was Fixed For Hearing On 29.06.2016 & On The Request Of The Ld. Dr Hearing Was Adjourned For Today I.E. 29.08.2016, Both The Parties Noted The Date. However, At The Time Of Hearing Nobody Was Present On Behalf Of The Assessee Neither Any Adjournment Was Sought. It, Therefore, Appears That The Assessee Is Not Interested To Prosecute The Matter. 3. The Law Aids Those Who Are Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Upon Their Rights. This Principle Is Embodied In Well Known Dictum, 2 Muddasir Nazar “Vigilantibus Et Non Dormientibus Jura Sub Veniunt’. Considering The Facts & 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.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 3515/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sh. Muddasir Nazar, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-274, Kabutar Market, Welcome Ward-34(3), Colony, New Seelampur-IV, New Delhi Delhi-110053 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADYPN0645H Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. S. K. Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 29.08.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 09.12.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-XXVII, New Delhi. 2. Earlier this case was fixed for hearing on 29.06.2016…

Vishal Malik, Noida vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

…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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). I.T.A .No.-4848/Del/2015 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 ord…

Rattan Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

…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 Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). I.T.A .No.-4823/Del/2015 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 ord…

The Siwanka Co-Op L/C Society Ltd., Sonepat vs. ACIT, Sonepat

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 3431/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 The Siwanka Co-op L/C Society Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income VPO Siwanka, Distt. Sonepat Tax, Sonepat Circle, Sonepat (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAATT3033G Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 07.04.2014 of ld. CIT(A), Rohtak. 2. Earlier this case was fixed for hearing on 28.06.2016 and on the reques…

Mr. Rajiv Malik, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2010-11

…ication for adjournment. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his appeal. 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 Page 1 of 2 480 (MP), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I 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 f…

Bergen Systems Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

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

…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 Page 1 of 3 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 reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled f…

Manish Kumar Bansal, Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaita No. 2574/Del/2014 : Assessment Year : 2009-10 Manish Kumar Bansal Vs Cit C/O M/S R.S. Jhalani & Co., Ca, Delhi-X 16-17, 1St Floor, Subzi Market, New Delhi. Hauz Quazi, Delhi. Ajopb3234A (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afwpc1171P Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2016

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2574/Del/2014 : Assessment Year : 2009-10 Manish Kumar Bansal Vs CIT C/o M/s R.S. Jhalani & Co., CA, Delhi-X 16-17, 1st Floor, Subzi Market, New Delhi. Hauz Quazi, Delhi. AJOPB3234A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AFWPC1171P Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 24.08.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2000 o…

M/S. Haryana Industries, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

…rested in prosecution of the present appeal. 3. Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice 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.), 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 his appearance at the time of hearing. 4. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. 5. Order prono…

Sh. Surendra Kumar Ahuja, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 6721/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Surendra Kumar Ahuja, Vs Income Tax Officer, Tara Chand Trading Co. 369, Ward-2(3), Bonja, Patel Marg, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABQPA6948Q Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 22.08.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 05.09.2014 of ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad. 2. Earlier this case fixed for hearing on 04.07.2016 and adj…

M/S. T & G Quality Management Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2009-10

…ication for adjournment. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of its appeal. 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 Page 1 of 3 480 (MP), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I 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 fo…

M/S. Enabling Dimensions India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2008-09

…ication for adjournment. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of its appeal. 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), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I Page 1 of 2 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 f…

M/S. International Academy of Insurance & Financial Management Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 1867 & 1868/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 International Academy Of Insurance Vs Income Tax Officer & Financial Management Pvt. Ltd., Ward-11(4), 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba New Delhi Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci3132R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. A. K. Saroha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2016 Order

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA Nos. 1867 & 1868/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 International Academy of Insurance Vs Income Tax Officer, & Financial Management Pvt. Ltd., Ward-11(4), 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba New Delhi Road, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCI3132R Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. A. K. Saroha, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 22.08.2016 ORDER These appeals by the assessee are directed against the order each dated 29.01.2014 and 07.02.20…

Mrs. Ramma Thakur, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04 Mrs. Ramma Thakur, D-761, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Saraswati Vihar, Delhi 25(1), New Delhi Pan : Admpt0093K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 18.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal, By The Assessee, Is Directed Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxiv, New Delhi, Dated 29.11.2012 For Assessment Year 2003-04. 2. When The Case Came Up For Hearing On 16.01.2014, Assessee’S Counsel Requested To Adjourn The Case, Which Was Adjourned To 07.07.2014. On 07.07.2014, When The Case Was Called Out, None Turned Up On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Case Was Adjourned To 23.12.2014. Again On 23.12.2014, No One Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Case Was Adjourned To 18.05.2014. Thereafter, The Case Was Listed For Several Times But Due To Non-Functioning Of The Bench The Case

…n that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. 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…

Mr. Aaloke Surie, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed for non prosecution

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Smt Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-2328/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

…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 11th of August , 2016. (G. D. AGRAWAL) JUDIC…