How many judgments cite CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate?

359 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (53 ITR 225), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 153A, Section 153C, Section 147, Section 132.

CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate

53 ITR 225Supreme Court of India1964#211 most cited

What is CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate authority for?

The Commissioner (Appeals) holds plenary powers when disposing of an appeal, with their scope being coterminous with the Assessing Officer. This allows the CIT(A) to exercise all powers of the AO, including admitting additional evidence and redetermining income.

359

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate · 53 ITR 225 · powers of Commissioner (Appeals) · plenary powers CIT(A) · scope of appellate authority · coterminous powers AO · admitting additional evidence appeal · appellate procedure · Section 246 powers · income-tax appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 153A Section 153C Section 147 Section 132 Section 153D Section 142(1)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 31(3)section 274(2)section 245ha casus omissus section 153(a)section 115ja section 144ba section 31 section 245 section 144a section 246 section 158bc

Judgments citing CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate

Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, Jaipur vs. ACIT Cen Cir 1, C-Scheme, Jaipur

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

ITA 538/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Tetuka, Adv., ARFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…the powers of the first appellant authority are very wide and co- terminus with those of the Assessing Officer and what Assessing Officer can do, he can do and what Assessing Officer fails to do, that also he can do [refer CIT v. Kanpur Cool Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC)]. Sections 251 and 252 of the Act have also worded keeping the same spirit, as also rule 46A. Section 250(4) empowers the learned CIT(A) to make further inquiries on its own or to direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and to report him. The embargo put on his power under rule 46A(1) and (2) has also been loosened by sub-rule (4…

Assistantcommissionerof Incometax, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. M/S. Anubandh Financial Services Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2390/KOL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 68

…Dattatreya [2011] 9 taxmann.com 106/197 Taxman 151 (Kar.). In fact, the appellate authority could substitute the order of the ITO by one of his own as held in V. Subramonia Iyer v. CIT [1978] 113 ITR 685 (Ker.). Further, in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC), it has been held that the scope of CIT(A) power is conterminous with that of the AO. He can I.T.A. No.: 2390/KOL/2024 C.O. No.: 5/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Anubandh Financial Services Private Limited. do what the AO can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do. If the AO has the option to assess one or other of the…

Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 444/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to the issue in appeal were already in the assessment records. As decided in the case of CIT -vs.- Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2016] 240 taxmann 133 (Bom.)/(2017) 297 CTR 614(Bom.), relying on the Supreme Court decisions in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC), CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 and CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee 118 ITR 461 (SC), the Ld. C.I.T.(A) is required to apply his mind to all issues which arise from the order appealed against before him and that he is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order and deciding the points raised in…

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

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

ITA 212/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA and Shri Vikas Yadav AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…onsidered it and decided the appeal on ments. particularly when the AO had passed the penalty order ignoring the same The Ld. CIT(A) overlooked all these vital aspects and blindly upheld the penalty imposed by the AO 6. In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 the Supreme Court held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal. The scope of his powers is co-terminus with that of the Income tax officer. He can do what the income tax officer can do and also directly to do what he is failed to do. This view was referated by Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of Indi…

Creative Ashtech Power Projects Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1587/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarcreative Ashtech Power V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Projects Private Limited, 7Th बनाम Income Tax, Circle– Floor, Raheja Point 1, Opp. 14(1)(2), Room No. 455, Vakola Market Nehru Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Santacruz (East), Mumbai– Marg, Mumbai – 400020, 400055, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcd1054F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(e)

…Act under the co-terminus powers conferred on him by the Act. 7.3 It is well-settled that powers of ld.CIT(A) are co- terminus with powers of the Assessing Officer. Useful reference may be made to order of Apex Court decision in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC) in which it was held that the first appellate authority, the CIT(A) in the case before us, has plenary powers in disposing off an appeal; that the scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the ITO; that he can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he failed to do. The hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs.…

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1, Jhunjhunu

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1182/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

…be any dispute over the settled legal proposition that the powers of the first appellate authority are very vide and co-terminus with those of the AO and what AO can do, he can do and what AO fail to do, that also he can do. Kindly refer Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC). Sections 251 and 252 of the Act have also been worded keeping the same spirit, as also rule 46A. Section 250 (4) empowers the CIT (A) to make further inquiries on its own or to direct the AO to make further inquiry and to report him, which also empower the CIT (A) to direct the production of any document / the examination of witness, to enab…

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1 Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1180/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1, Jhunjhunu

ITA 1179/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

Diesh Kumar Goyal, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kota

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

ITA 32/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 May 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68Section 69

…AO, when out of thin air, he has deduced that penalty has been levied by the AO taking strength from Explanation 1 below section 271(1)(c), whereas the AO has made no such mention in the penalty order passed by him. 2.5 In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 the Supreme Court held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal. The scope of his powers is co-terminus with that of the Income tax officer. He can do what the Income tax officer can do and also directly to do what he is failed to do. This view was reiterated by Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of Ind…

Abdul Aziz, Dudu vs. ITO Ward 7(3), Lal Kothi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1025/JPR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…. CIT(A) under Rule 46A, who arbitrarily rejected the same. The powers of the first Appellate Authority are very wide and co-terminus with those of the AO and what AO can do, he can do and what AO fails to do, that also he can do [refer Kanpur Coal Syndicate, 53 ITR 225 (SC)]. Section 251 and Section 252 of the Act have also been worded keeping the same spirit, as also Rule 46A. Section 250(4) empowers the CIT(A) to make further inquiries on its own or to direct the AO to make further inquiry and to report to him. The embargo put on his power under Rule 46A(1) and (2) has also been loosened by sub-rule 4 which em…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), New Delhi vs. Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3559/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…on facts, Commissioner (Appeals) ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others rightly deleted addition made by Assessing Officer - Held, yes [Paras 7, 8 and 11] [in favour of assessee]" Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kanpur Coals Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 has held that "the appellate Commissioner has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal. The Hon'ble Court further held that the scope of the power of CIT(A) is coterminous with the AO." Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. K. S. Dattatreya [2011] 197 taxman 151 has held that "as a revisional authority commissioner ap…

Praksh Pushparaj Golcha, Andheri (W) vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4417/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarpraksh Pushparaj Golcha, V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of 6A, Shivkrupa H Wing, बनाम Income Tax– 24(3), Old Nagardas Road, M/O Finance, Income Tax Andheri(W), Department, National Faceless Mumbai-400 069, Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabpg9404H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Mr.Ruturaj H. Gurjar,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani,(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…for the decision. It is well-settled that powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with powers of the AO. Reference could be made to order of hon’ble P a g e | 10 A.Y. 2011-12 Prakash Pushparaj Golcha, Mumbai Apex Court decision in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC) in which it was held that AAC has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal; that the scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the ITO, that he can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he failed to do. We draw support from order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2016] 24…

Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur

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

ITA 19/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT a

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…te authority, at least, he ought to have provided relief to that extent. Baldly stating that the appeal has been dismissed on all grounds on merits is a mere alibi to cover up the dismissal of appeal for non-compliance. In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 the Supreme Court held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal. The scope of his powers is co-terminus with that of the Income tax officer. He can do what the Income tax officer can do and also directly to do what he is failed to do. This view was reiterated by Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of Ind…

Harsha, Jiwana Baghpat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(5) Baraut, Baraut

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

ITA 3527/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Harsha, Ward-1(5), Jiwana Baghpat-250611, Vs. Baraut. Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Adlph3085L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri R.K. Gaur, Ca Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/02/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Vide Order U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) Dated 01/11/2023 For The Asst. Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & During This Year Had Purchased An Agricultural Land Measuring 8.8200 Hectare In Auction Jointly With Five Other Persons At A Total Sale Consideration Of Rs.1,50,82,200/-. Beside This A Sum Of Rs. Harsha Vs. Ito 7,55,000/- Was Paid Towards Stamp Duty Making Total Cost Of Land Was At Rs. 1,65,92,000/-. As The Assessee Has Not Filed Any Return Of Income, The Reassessment Proceedings Were Initiated By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 On 29/03/2019. The Assessee Has Not Attended The Reassessment Proceedings & The Finally The Reassessment Order Was Passed U/S 144/147 Of The Act On 7/12/2019 Wherein The Ao Had Made The Addition Of Rs. 27,65,333/- Being His Share In Investment In Acquisition Of The Property From Undisclosed Sources.

Section 144Section 148Section 250

…sessee before the ld. CIT(A). All these details go to the root of the matter and thus the same should be admitted and not admitting the same is gross violation of principal of natural justice. Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate reported in 53 ITR 225 (SC) held that first appellant authority has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal and he can do what Assessing Officer could do. 6. Ld. CIT (A) had all the powers as of Assessing Officer while considering the appeal of assessee. He had power to reduce/enhance the income. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice and equity, we hold th…

Puneet Singhvi, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kota

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

ITA 1294/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 234ASection 48Section 50C

…l Financial Services V ITO ITA No. 2147/Del/2017 held as: “Further, it is well-settled that powers of Ld. CIT(A) are coterminus with powers of the Assessing Officer. Useful reference may be made to order of Apex Court decision in CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC) in which it was held that the first appellate authority, the Ld. CIT(A) in the case before us, has plenary powers in disposing off an appeal; that the scope of her power is co-terminus with that of the ITO, that she can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he failed to do. In this context, useful reference may also be made to…

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)

DCIT CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Ltd, Kurla, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3802/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh and Shri A. Pawar ARsFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITANo.3802/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2018-19) DCIT CentralCircle-1(1), v/s. Edelweiss Tokio Life Mumbai, 905, 9th Floor, बनाम Insurance Company Ltd., Pratishtha Bhavan, M.K. 6th Floor, Tower 3, Wing B, Road, Mumbai, Kohinoor City Mall, Kirol Maharashtra – 400 020 Road, Kurla (West), Kurla S.O, Mumbai 400070, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AACCE2709H .. Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी Appellant by : Shri Ajay Singh and Shri A. Pawar ARs Respondent by : S…

DCIT, Central Circle-II, Noida vs. Nagpal Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1596/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Dcit Vs Nagpal Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-Ii 697 Katra Neel Chandni Noida. Chowk, New Delhi-110006. Pan-Aabcn9620F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

…entioned that the AR was directed during the appellate proceedings tor furnish confirmed copy of accounts of debtors to whom sales above Rs. 1 Lac were made in cash. Powers of CIT(A) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC) has held as under:- "The AAC has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal. The scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the ITO. He can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do. If the ITO has the option to assess one or other of the entities in the alternative, the AAC can direct him to do what the ITO…

Aravali Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1328/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 37

…atter considered by the AO and determined in the course of assessment. In other words, the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the AO. He can do whatever the AO can do and can direct the AO to do what he failed to do. Refer: Kanvur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC). In view of this, the Courts have taken a view that there is no reason to justify the curtailment of powers of the CIT(A) to entertain additional grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee in seeking modification of the assessment order passed by the AO. Jute Corp. of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) National Thermal Power Co, Ltd. 229 ITR 383 (SC),…

Aravali Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1327/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 37