Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.48 seconds)
Xcellon Education Limited,, Ahmedabad vs The Addl. Cit, Tds,, Ahmedabad on 1 October, 2024 cites

Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) ... vs B. N.Bhattacharjee & Anr on 4 May, 1979

The Tribunal relied on judicial precedents, including the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee (118 ITR 461) and the Hon'ble M.P. High Court's decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT (223 ITR 480), as well as the ITAT Delhi Bench's decision in Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution. However, the Tribunal allowed the appellant to apply for a recall of the order within the prescribed time, upon providing suitable reasons. The ITAT made the following observations, while passing the order:
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 2306 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Devendra Kumar Gangal, Noida vs Dcit, Central Circle , Noida on 29 March, 2022

(c) No. 402/2020, wherein applying same analogy, the order of dismissal of the appeal ex parte dated 30.08.2019 stood quashed and the main appeal has been restored to the file of the IT AT by the ITAT with a direction to dispose of the same on merit. The said order was also relied upon by the Coordinate Bench in the matter of Devendra Kumar B. Chopra vs. DCIT in M.A. Nos. 159 & 160/Ahd/2020, on identical facts and circumstances of the case; the appeal so dismissed due 'to non-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Dolphin Metal (India) Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4),, ... on 4 May, 2018

"2. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed vide ITAT order dated 20th Feb, 2018 as none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the date of hearing. The assessee has explained the reason for not filing the Miscellaneous Application within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed as elaborated supra supported by an affidavit and copies of other documents/details. The assessee has also pointed out that previous tax consultant has not attended his tax matter satisfactorily and new tax consultant has obtained various documents, these circumstances and his ill health caused delay in filing this appeal against ex-parte order which was passed on account of non-prosecution. After taking into consideration the facts narrated by the assessee supported by an affidavit/documents it appears that there was reasonable cause for non-appearance and delay in filing the Miscellaneous Application against ex-parte order passed on account of nonprosecution. Therefore, keeping in view of Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal, 1963) and after taking into consideration the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court cited in the case of Dolphin Metal (India) Ltd. vs. ITO supra, we condone the delay in filing the Miscellaneous Application. Considering the above facts and findings, the Miscellaneous Application is allowed and the Registry is directed to list this case for hearing on 30th March, 2021.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1