Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.41 seconds)
Gita Devi, Bhilai, Durg vs Income Tax Officer-1(4), Bhilai, Durg on 21 December, 2023 cites

Shreemati Jaswanti Devi L/H Of Late Shri ... vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Bhilai on 27 March, 2023

In my view, in case the CIT(Appeals) was not persuaded to allow any further time to the assessee, then he was obligated to have clearly declined assessee's request for adjournment dated 04.03.2023 (supra) and ought to have further proceeded with 9 Gita Devi, Bhilai Vs. ITO-1(4), Bhilai ITA No. 197/RPR/2023 the matter after bringing the said fact to the notice of the assessee. By not doing so, the CIT(Appeals) had divested the assessee of a fair opportunity to prosecute the matter before him. I, thus, in terms of my aforesaid observations am of the view that the matter, in all fairness and interest of justice requires to be restored to the file of the CIT(Appeals) to re-adjudicate the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee who shall remain at a liberty to substantiate her claim on the basis of fresh documentary evidence, if any.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central ... vs Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd., New ... on 2 September, 2011

6.6 In a decision in the case of CIT v. Gold Leaf Capital Corporation Ltd. On 02.09.2011 (ITA no.798 of 2009), the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had held that a negligent assessee should not be given many opportunities just because that quantum of amount involved is high. Necessary course of action is to draw adverse inference; otherwise it would amount to give premium to the assessee for his negligence.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 19 - A K Sikri - Full Document

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

6.2 The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in CIT v. B. N. Bhattarcharjee and Another (10 CTR 354) that " appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it." This means that an appeal must mean an 'effective appeal' and that to "prefer an appeal" would mean effectively prosecuting an appeal. Purposefully and constructively interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it and if a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 2306 - V R Iyer - Full Document

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs R. Srinivasan on 28 February, 2000

Gita Devi, Bhilai Vs. ITO-1(4), Bhilai ITA No. 197/RPR/2023 6.4 The principle that every court that is to 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 the latter case, the Apex Court has held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 162 - S S Ahmad - Full Document
1