CIT v. Ashoka Engineering Co.

194 ITR 645Supreme Court of India1992#7457 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also reported as

63 Taxmann 510

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 148Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 249(4)Section 250(6B)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 249(2)section 249(3)section 249section 24commissioner (appeals)section 25income from other sourcescondonation of delayopportunity of being heardsection 139section 69asection 148

Judgments citing CIT v. Ashoka Engineering Co.

DAS PROCESSORS,RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1 RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

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

ITA 780/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 780/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19) Das Processors, 44 Vardhman Nagar Vs Income Tax Officer-1 Jain School Road, Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon, Fci Road, Chhattisgarh-491441 Near Raipur Naka Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh-491441 Pan: Aaifd6768Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 263

…ot by applying a strict, constricted and myopic view. The decision whether the right to appeal is available in a particular circumstance should be guided by the form and not substance of the order appealed against [CIT Vs. Ashoka Engineering Co. 63 Taxman 510/194 ITR 645 (SC)]. 6. After thoughtful consideration of the material available on the record, we are of the view that the appellant assessee deserves reasonable opportunity of being heard to make shortcomings or non-compliance if any. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, afore-stated observations and without offering any comment on merit of the cas…

KAMLESH SHARMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 70/RPR/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 70/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2020-21) Kamlesh Sharma, House No.109, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Harihant Nagar, Sarona, Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Ring Road No.1, Raipur-492001, Cg Building, Civil Lines, Raipur-492001 Pan: Bppps4514C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 06/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2020-21 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.12.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’), Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 249(3)Section 250Section 57Section 69

…ot by applying a strict, constricted and myopic view. The decision whether the right to appeal is available in a particular circumstance should be guided by the form and not substance of the order appealed against [CIT Vs. Ashoka Engineering Co. 63 Taxman 510/194 ITR 645 (SC)]. 7. After thoughtful consideration of the material available on the record, we are of the view that the appellant assessee deserves reasonable opportunity of being heard to make shortcomings or non-compliance if any. Therefore, considering all facts of the case. afore-stated observations and without offering any comment on merit of the cas…

VINOD KUMAR KAILASHCHANDRA VERMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 69/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 69/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vinod Kumar Khailashchandra Verma, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), House No.496/9, Avanti Vihar, Sector-2, Central Revenue Building, Telibandha, Raipur-492001 (C.G.) Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G. 492001 Pan: Aanpv5964B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. (Adjournment Petition Filed.) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 06/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: None. (Adjournment petition filed.)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधरी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अवधेश कुमार िम", लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 69/RPR/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vinod Kumar Khailashchandra Verma, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), House No.496/9, Avanti Vihar, Sector-2, Central Revenue Building, Telibandha, Raipur-492001 (C.G.) Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G. 492001 PAN: AANPV5964B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee by : None.…

SAVITA SANJAY MARGHADE,DURG, CHHATTISGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHILAI

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

ITA 849/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 849/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2013-14) Savita Sanjay Marghade, Mig-658, Vs Income Tax Officer, Aaykar Bhavan, Padmanabhpur, Durg, Chhattisgarh. Opposite Geet Talkies, 491001 New Civic Centre, Sector 6 Bhilai Nagar, Chhattisgarh. 490006 Pan: Aktpm6715H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 17/02/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2013-14 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.10.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’), Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 249(3)Section 250

…ot by applying a strict, constricted and myopic view. The decision whether the right to appeal is available in a particular circumstance should be guided by the form and not substance of the order appealed against [CIT Vs. Ashoka Engineering Co. 63 Taxman 510/194 ITR 645 (SC)]. The right of appeal is a valuable right and unless expressly taken away or abandoned, it could not be held that the appellant had abandoned or lost such right by implication [Indian Aluminium Co Ltd. Vs. CIT 162 ITR 788 (Cal.)]. The right to appeal is not merely a matter of procedure. It is a substantive right. 10. In view of the above, w…

RAJAT KUMAR GUPTA, RAMANUJGANJ,BALRAMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 737/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 736 & 737/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Rajat Kumar Gupta, V Income Tax Officer-1, Near Power House Road, S Kharsiya Marg, Tatapani, Ramanujganj, S.O., Near Ambika Petrol Pump, Surguja- 497220, C.G. Ambikapur-497335, C.G. Pan: Bpfpg5887N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 05.01.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Since Facts, Grounds & Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Identical; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together For Adjudication By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

…ot by applying a strict, constricted and myopic view. The decision whether the right to appeal is available in a particular circumstance should be guided by the form and not substance of the order appealed against [CIT Vs. Ashoka Engineering Co. 63 Taxman 510/194 ITR 645 (SC)]. The right of appeal is a valuable right and unless expressly taken away or abandoned, it could not be held that the appellant had abandoned or lost such right by implication [Indian Aluminium Co Ltd. Vs. CIT 162 ITR 788 (Cal.)]. The right to appeal is not merely a matter of Rajat Kumar Gupta Vs ITO-1, Ambikapur procedure. It is a substanti…

RAJAT KUMAR GUPTA, SURGUJA,AMBIKAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 736/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 736 & 737/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Rajat Kumar Gupta, V Income Tax Officer-1, Near Power House Road, S Kharsiya Marg, Tatapani, Ramanujganj, S.O., Near Ambika Petrol Pump, Surguja- 497220, C.G. Ambikapur-497335, C.G. Pan: Bpfpg5887N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 05.01.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Since Facts, Grounds & Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Identical; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together For Adjudication By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

…ot by applying a strict, constricted and myopic view. The decision whether the right to appeal is available in a particular circumstance should be guided by the form and not substance of the order appealed against [CIT Vs. Ashoka Engineering Co. 63 Taxman 510/194 ITR 645 (SC)]. The right of appeal is a valuable right and unless expressly taken away or abandoned, it could not be held that the appellant had abandoned or lost such right by implication [Indian Aluminium Co Ltd. Vs. CIT 162 ITR 788 (Cal.)]. The right to appeal is not merely a matter of Rajat Kumar Gupta Vs ITO-1, Ambikapur procedure. It is a substanti…

RAJA SATHEESHKUMAR,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(6), SALEM

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2942/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri George George K & Before Hon’Ble Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2942/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Raja Satheeshkumar, Income Tax Officer, H.No.2/167, Cecg Nagar, Alagapuram, Ward-1(6), Periyapudur, Salem, Salem. Tamil Nadu-636 016. [Pan: Auqps9210G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.Bhupendran S, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 246Section 246A

…sidered the rival submissions. There is no dispute about the proposition that there is no inherent right of appeal. It is to be specifically conferred by the statute providing for an appeal. But as stated by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Ashoka Engg. Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645, it is an equally well-settled proposition or law that, if there is a provision conferring a right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner. We are, therefore, to construe the provisions of section 246 in the light of this well-settled legal position. So far as the first submission is concerned which relates to t…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARI vs. M/S. NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST, RAICHUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/BANG/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V Chandrashekar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11Section 115BSection 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 7

…y denies any remedy to the defendant, by way of an appeal on merits. “Therefore, unless the admission is clear, unambiguous and unconditional, the discretion of the Court should not be exercised.” Further, it was held in the case of CIT Vs. Syed Jafer & Sons (194 ITR 645) (SC) that a provision granting the right of appeal to the subject should be construed liberally. 6.5 In our opinion, the right to file appeal to be given liberal construction since they are remedial in nature. A right to appeal will not be restricted or denied unless such construction is unavoidable as per the judgement in the case of CIT v. Be…

DDIT, NOIDA vs. M/S. PT L.P. DISPLAY INDONESIA, INDONESIA

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1888/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…essment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10 which are dismissed by the CIT(A) on the technical ground that the PAN quoted in the Memo of appeal was not that of the assessee but that of the Authorized signatory. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Ashoka Engg.Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645 (SC) has held as under:- “But it is an equally well settled preposition of law that, if there is a provision conferring right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner.” 26. Applying the said ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court(supra), we find that there is no merit in the summary disposal of the appea…

DDIT, NOIDA vs. M/S. PT L.P. DISPLAY INDONESIA, INDONESIA

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1887/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…essment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10 which are dismissed by the CIT(A) on the technical ground that the PAN quoted in the Memo of appeal was not that of the assessee but that of the Authorized signatory. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Ashoka Engg.Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645 (SC) has held as under:- “But it is an equally well settled preposition of law that, if there is a provision conferring right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner.” 26. Applying the said ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court(supra), we find that there is no merit in the summary disposal of the appea…

M/S. PT. LP DISPLAY INDONESIA,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1847/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…essment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10 which are dismissed by the CIT(A) on the technical ground that the PAN quoted in the Memo of appeal was not that of the assessee but that of the Authorized signatory. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Ashoka Engg.Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645 (SC) has held as under:- “But it is an equally well settled preposition of law that, if there is a provision conferring right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner.” 26. Applying the said ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court(supra), we find that there is no merit in the summary disposal of the appea…

M/S. PT. LP DISPLAY INDONESIA,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1846/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…essment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10 which are dismissed by the CIT(A) on the technical ground that the PAN quoted in the Memo of appeal was not that of the assessee but that of the Authorized signatory. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Ashoka Engg.Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645 (SC) has held as under:- “But it is an equally well settled preposition of law that, if there is a provision conferring right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner.” 26. Applying the said ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court(supra), we find that there is no merit in the summary disposal of the appea…

M/S. PT. LP DISPLAY INDONESIA,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1845/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…essment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10 which are dismissed by the CIT(A) on the technical ground that the PAN quoted in the Memo of appeal was not that of the assessee but that of the Authorized signatory. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Ashoka Engg.Co. [1992] 194 ITR 645 (SC) has held as under:- “But it is an equally well settled preposition of law that, if there is a provision conferring right of appeal, it should be read in a reasonable, practical and liberal manner.” 26. Applying the said ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court(supra), we find that there is no merit in the summary disposal of the appea…

V. RAMU,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, PUDUKKOTTAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2252/CHNY/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: 04.04.2017
Section 10Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)

…s High Courts and the Supreme Court and it has invariably been held by every High Court that unless the right is expressly granted in the statute, the existence of the right of appeal cannot be implied. The Supreme Court in CIT v. Ashoka Engineering CO.(1992) 194 ITR 645(SC), reiterating the 6 proposition, held that there is no inherent right of appeal to any assessee and that it has to be specifically spelt from the words of the statute, if any providing for an appeal. (d) An argument can be taken from the appellant's side that since the appeal is against an order made u/s.154 of the Act, the same is an "appeal…

CROMPTON GREAVES LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT -6, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 2836/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar"ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" । आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1994/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2836/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Crompton Greaves बनाम/ Cit – 6,Mumbai, Ltd.,6Th Floor, C.G. House, 5Th Floor, V. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 030. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc3840K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep N. Kapasi Revenue By : Shri C.W. Angolkar सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2016

For Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar
Section 143(3)Section 263

…is a statutory right which emanates only from the statute. The assessee does not have a vested right to appeal unless provided for in the statute . Reference is drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ashoka Engineering Co. (1992) 194 ITR 645(SC) whereby the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that : “7. We have heard the counsels for both the parties. The question at issue is regarding a right of appeal. It is true that there is no inherent right of appeal to any assessee and that it has to be spelt from the words of the statute, if any, providing for an appeal. But it is an equally well-set…