Dr. P. Nalla Thampy v. Shankar

3 SCC 242Supreme Court of India2000#1337 most cited

What is Dr. P. Nalla Thampy v. Shankar authority for?

A court or quasi-judicial authority, tasked with deciding disputes, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case for default if a party is absent at a hearing. It is not obligated to keep the matter pending or pursue it on the absent party's behalf.

85

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Dr. P. Nalla Thampy v. Shankar · New India Assurance v. Srinivasan · 3 SCC 242 · inherent power to dismiss for default · non-prosecution of appeal · non-appearance · Section 250 Income Tax Act · Section 253 Income Tax Act · quasi-judicial body · dismissal of appeal for non-compliance

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 147Section 1961Section 148Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 114section 253(3)section 253(5)reasoned ordersection 80p(2)section 253genuineness of the transactionsection 80pdelay in filing appealunexplained investmentscrutiny assessmentlimited scrutiny

Judgments citing Dr. P. Nalla Thampy v. Shankar

Mahesh Mittal, Lucknow vs. ACIT, Range-5, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 73/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshramahesh Mittal V. Acit, Range-5 1/16, Vinay Khand Gomti Income Tax Office Ashok Nagar, Lucknow-226010. Marg, Lucknow-226001. Pan:Acqpm4459B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Akshay Agarwal, Adv Respondent By: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, CIT(DR)
Section 10(38)Section 68

…who has moved it not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power, which every Tribunal possesses. This was approved in Dr. P. Nallla Thampy vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC63). In New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, it was held that every Court or Judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide a lis between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the Court or Judicial or Quasi-judicial Body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before it o…

Badam Singh, Bhopal vs. ITO 4(1), Bhopal

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

ITA 127/IND/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshibadam Singh, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 392 Gram Palasi, 4(1), Vs. New Jail Road, Bhopal Karond, Bhopal (Pan: Drhps5664B) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 282

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Badam Singh, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 392 Gram Palasi, 4(1), Vs. New Jail Road, Bhopal Karond, Bhopal (PAN: DRHPS5664B) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri S.S. Solanki, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, DR Date of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for…

Anupam Shailesh Syal, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2)(6), Surat

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

ITA 1281/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1281/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Anupam Shailesh Syal, Vs. Ito, 103, 104 Jay Vijay Park, Near Ward – 3(2)(6), Sardar Bridge, Adaja, Surat-395009 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Andps7890N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca Respondent By Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2025

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1281/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Anupam Shailesh Syal, Vs. ITO, 103, 104 Jay Vijay Park, Near Ward – 3(2)(6), Sardar Bridge, Adaja, Surat-395009 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ANDPS7890N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Kiran K. Shah, CA Respondent by Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement 21/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal b…

Subhash Murarka, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 176/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Subhash Murarka C-1/85/186-R7, Swarnabhoomi, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aeqpm4578P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.176/RPR/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Subhash Murarka C-1/85/186-R7, Swarnabhoomi, Raipur, Chhattisgarh PAN: AEQPM4578P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Ayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 04.07.2025 घोषणा…

Bhawani Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 4(1), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 471/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 471/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2011-12 cuke Bhawani Singh ITO, Vs. 126, Saket Colony Path No. 7 Ward 4(1), Sikar Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BNNPS 2334 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Nikhilesh Kataria, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by :…

Sh. Sanjiv Jha, Dholpur vs. ITO, Ward-4, Bharatpur

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

ITA 610/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CA (Thru: V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT -DR a
Section 144Section 148

…" SHRI SANJIV JHA VS ITO, WARD -4, BHARATPUR The above proposition has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63) Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242. has stated as under- "That every court or judicial body or authonty, which has a duty to decide a list between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or the judicial or quasi-judicial body is under no obligation to keep the matter pendin…

Jasbir Singh Oberoi, Raipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 311/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.311/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jasbir Singh Oberoi Legal Heir Late Parvinder Kaur Oberoi C/O. Oberoi Tour & Travels, Shop No.1, Wali Mohd. Building, K.K Road, Moudhapara, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aagpo2025P ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…ecide on a matter of dispute, inherently possesses the power to dismiss the case for default, has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63 and the case of New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242. In the latter case, the Apex Court has held as under:- "That every court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide a list between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or the judicial or quasi-judicial body is under no…

Nilima Nayak, Kendrapara vs. Income Tax Officer, Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara

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

ITA 180/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

…nd other judicial pronouncements in the cases of CIT v B.N. Bhattacharya 118 ITR 461 (SC) and The Ld. DR. P. Nalla Thampy I.T.A. No.: 180/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nilima Nayak. v Shankar (1984)(Supp) SCC 63 and New India Assurance v Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242 (SC) and since despite having afforded various opportunities in para 4 of his order, the ld CIT(A) noted that the assessee failed to submit any explanation with regard to cash deposit during demonetisation period, therefore, both the additions made by the Ld. AO amounting to Rs.9,60,000/- were confirmed and the appeal was dismissed. 6. None appeare…

Hajaria Soft Services Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 74/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshraआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.74/Lkw/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Hajaria Soft Services Pvt Ltd Income Tax Officer-3(2) V. A-1462, Sec-1, Lda Colony, Lucknow-New Kanpur Road Ashiyana, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226012. 57, Ram Tirath Marg, Hazratganj, Lucknow- 226001. Pan:Aadch6101R अपीलाथ"/(Appellant) ""यथ"/(Respondent) अपीलाथ" "क और से/Appellant By: None ""यथ" "क और से /Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) आदेश / O R D E R Per Anadee Nath Misshra, A.M.: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 05/08/2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: -

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 69Section 80J

…atter of dispute, inherently possesses the power to dismiss the case for default, has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. NallaThampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63 and the case of New India Assurance vs. Page 4 of 7 Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242. In the latter case, the Apex Court has held that, “That every court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty fo decide a list between two patties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or the judicial or quasi judicial body is under no oblig…

Bahadur Singh, Zirakpur vs. ITO Ward 3(5), Chandigarh

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

ITA 706/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 54B

…t power which every tribunal possesses.” 5.3 The above proposition has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63). Further Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, has stated as under: “That every court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide a list between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or the judicial or quasi-judicial body is under no obligation to keep the matter pend…

Krishan Kumar Yadav, Alwar vs. ITO Ward, Behror

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

ITA 69/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Him. 2

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, Adv. & Shri Harsh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80

…who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal therefore, is an inherent power, which every tribunal possesses. This was approved in Dr. P. Nallia Thampy vs Shankar (1984(Supp) SCC63). In New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, it was held that every Court or judicial body or authority, which has duty to decide a lies between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or judicial or Quasi-judicial Body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before it or…

Ravi Kumar Kumhar, Janjgir-Champa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bilaspur

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

ITA 36/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.36/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ravikumar Kumhar Ward No.02, Darri Road, Naila, Jangir-Champa-495668 Pan: Jfypk3987N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 114Section 147

…ho has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power, which every tribunal possesses. This was approved in Dr. P Nalla Thampy vs. Shankar 1984 (Supp) SCC 63). In new India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, it was held that every court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide a case between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or the judicial or quasi-judicial body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before…

Kamakshi Diamonds Private Limited, Surat vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 841/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.841/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamakshi Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ Office No.203, 2Nd Floor 1(1)(3), Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Vs. Panchratna Apartment, Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Dalgrya Sheri, Mahindrapura, Hospital, Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaeck 0477 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By None राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 10/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/03/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…9.2009, after referring to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sunderlal Mannalal vs. Nandramdas Dwarkadas AIR 1958 MP 260, Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera vs. B.L. Shankar 1984 (Supp) SCC, 631 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. R. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242 held that every court and tribunal has an inherent power to dismiss a proceeding for non-prosecution when the petitioner/appellant before it does not wish to prosecute the proceedings. In the present appeal, the appellant has been non-compliant before the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal. No useful purpose will be served in prolonging proceedings bef…

M/S. Ruby Gems Private Limited, Surat vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 613/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S Ruby Gems Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ 10/15,Crown Plaza, 2(1)(1), Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Vs. Salabatpura, Surat-395 002 Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaecr 3885 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By None राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 13/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/03/2025

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

…9.2009, after referring to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sunderlal Mannalal vs. Nandramdas Dwarkadas AIR 1958 MP 260, Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera vs. B.L. Shankar 1984 (Supp) SCC, 631 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. R. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242 held that every court and tribunal has an inherent power to dismiss a proceeding for non-prosecution when the petitioner/appellant before it does not wish to prosecute the proceeding. In the present appeal, the appellant has been non-compliant before the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal. It has also filed the appeal beyond the statutory time limit av…

M/S Shri Mangalam Traders, Mahasamund, Mahasamud vs. Income Tax Officer, Mahasamund, Mahasamud

In the result, appeal of the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 538/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.538/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Shri Mangalam Traders 1, Village-Parsada, Post- Bemcha, Tehsil: Mahasamund-493 445 (C.G.) Pan : Abdfs1546F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Mahasamund (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…decide on a matter of dispute, inherently possesses the power to dismiss the case for default, has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. NallaThampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63 and the case of New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242. In 6 M/s. Shri Mangalam Traders Vs. ITO, Mahasamund ITA No.538 /RPR/2024 the latter case, the Apex Court has held as under:- "That every court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide a list between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not…

Ram Babu Jhalani, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Jaipur

ITA 1218/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Him. 2.1 At The Outset Of Hearing, The Bench Observed That There Is Delay Of 151 Days In Filing Of The Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Filed Application For Seeking Condonation Of Delay, With Following Prayers & The Assessee To This Effect Also Filed An Affidavit Also :-

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Khandelwal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT (Th. V.C.)
Section 147Section 250

…who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power, which every tribunal possesses. This was approved in Dr. P. NalliaThampyvs Shankar (1984(Supp) SCC63). In New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242, it was held that every Court or judicial body or authority, which has a duty to decide lies between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the court or judicial or Quasi- judicial Body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before it o…

Mustafa Katthawala, Kota vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 1156/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 244ASection 45(3)

…decide on a matter of dispute inherently possesses the power to dismiss the case for default, has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Vs. Shankar (1984 (Supp) SCC 63 and the case of New India Assurance Vs. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC 242. All of the above judicial precedents established/ upheld by the Hon'ble Courts apply in the instant case of the applicant. 6. I have considered the assessment order, Statement of Facts submitted by the appellant along with Form 35 and the material on record and find that the AO has given complete reasoning in the assessment order for making an add…

Liyakat Rojan Miya Ansari, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 464/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.464/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Liyakat Rojan Miya Ansari, Vs. The Ito, 252, Royal Park Society, Palod, Ward – 2(1), Mangrol, Surat - 394110 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeupl7280B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/01/2025

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 69A

…has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power which every Tribunal possesses. This was approved in Dr. P. Nalla Thampy vs. Shankar, 1984 (Supp) SCC 631. In New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan, (2000) 3 SCC 242, it was held that every Court or judicial body or authority which has a duty to decide a lis between two parties, inherently possesses the power to dismiss a case in default. Where a case is called up for hearing and the party is not present, the Court or the judicial or quasi-judicial body is under no obligation to keep the matter pending before i…

Euro Jewels, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 236/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.236/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Euro Jewles, Vs. The Dcit, Plot No.258-A, Surat Special Economic Circle – 1(1)(1), Zone, Gidc Sachin, Surat - 394230 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bkipp5896G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2025

Section 10ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69C

…relied upon the decisions in cases of CIT vs. B. N. Bhattarjee & Others, (1979) 10 CTR 354 (SC), Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, (1979) 223 ITR 480 (MP), Dr. P. Nalla Thampy vs. Shankar, (1984 (Supp) SCC 63, New India Assurance vs. Srinivasan, (2000) 3 SCC 242, CIT vs. Gold Leaf Corporation Ltd., in ITA No.798 of 2009, dated 02.09.2011 and observed that appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Thereafter, he has observed that due to non-compliance by assessee, AO had to passed order u/s ITA No.236/SRT/2024/AY.2012-13 Euro Jewels 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, which was a speaki…

Sureshbhai Raghubhai Thorat, Valsad vs. ITO, Ward-7, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 426/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.426/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Sureshbhai Raghubhai Thorat, Vs. The Ito, Siddharth Villa, At Post Ozar, Ward – 7, Mota Pondha B.O., Valsad – Vapi 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acapt3507F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/01/2025

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.426/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Sureshbhai Raghubhai Thorat, Vs. The ITO, Siddharth Villa, At Post Ozar, Ward – 7, Mota Pondha B.O., Valsad – Vapi 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACAPT3507F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 03/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanat…