CIT v. Union Tyres

240 ITR 556High Court1999#764 most cited

What is CIT v. Union Tyres authority for?

The first appellate authority, the Commissioner (Appeals), cannot enhance an assessment by considering a new scope or source of income that was not part of the original assessment proceedings. Its power to enhance under Section 251(1)(a) is restricted to what was originally assessed.

135

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Union Tyres · Section 251(1)(a) · CIT(A) enhancement · new scope of income · appellate authority jurisdiction · assessment enhancement · first appellate authority powers · Section 251

Also reported as

107 Taxmann 447103 Taxmann.com 196

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 147Section 251(1)(a)Section 148Section 132Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

place of effective managementsection 6(3)section 127(1)section 31(3)legal expensessection 251(1)ddtpreponderance of probabilityprincipal officersection 251(1)(a)shell companyroyalty income

Judgments citing CIT v. Union Tyres

INCOME TAX OFFICER , INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. TRUE VALUE HOMES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1213/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 142(1)Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 44ASection 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी ट" वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1213/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2018-19 ITO, True Value Homes (India) Private Corporate Ward - 6(1), vs. Limited, Chennai. No. 21, C V Raman Road, TVH Triveni, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. Tamil Nadu. [PAN: AAACT-7955-Q] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) "नधा%*रती क, ओर से/Assessee by : Shri. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. राज"व…

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, DELHI

ITA 7/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

…g the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or\nsection 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement\nunder section 251 of the Income Tax Act\n13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres\n[1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot\nconsider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act.\n\"Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant\nCommissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act\nempowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal b…

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

ITA 51/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 326/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, DELHI

ITA 281/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, DELHI, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 272/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 03, DELHI

ITA 271/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, DELHI

ITA 2951/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, DELHI

ITA 2950/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 2756/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

ITA 2714/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

ITA 2713/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 2512/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 2511/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, NEW DELHI

ITA 2510/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, NEW DELHI

ITA 2509/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…being the case the correct recourse would have been section 147/148 or section 263 but the CIT(A) exceeded its jurisdiction by making enhancement under section 251 of the Income Tax Act 13.13 The Division Bench of Delhi High court in CIT v. Union Tyres [1999] 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) reiterated that the first appellate authority cannot consider new scope of income under section 251(1) of the Act. "Section 251 of the Act prescribes the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, now the Commissioner (Appeals). Section 251(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in disposing of an appeal by the…

PLHR HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 32,, DELHI

ITA 4571/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 147Section 2Section 251(1)(a)

…leted under the specific provision; no alleged general provision would come to the Revenue’s aid as is done in the lower appellate discussion in issue. And also that going by CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Union Tyres (1990) 240 ITR 556 (Del.) and CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Del.)(FB), there is no such option of changing the head of income in section 251(1)(a) “enhancement” jurisdiction as well. The impugned twin additions of Rs. 20 lakh as well as Rs. 60,000/- herein, are hereby deleted, therefore. 3. This assessee’s appeal ITA 4571/Del/2025 is allowed. Orde…

TAKSHSHILA CO-OP GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 59(2), VIKAS BHAWAN

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4245/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 144Section 57Section 69A

…/- to that under section 69A of the Act, in the lower appellate discussion. 4. That being the case, I hereby quote CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC); CIT Vs. Sardari Lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Union Tyres (1999) 240 ITR 556 (Del.) to conclude that such a course of action changing heads of the impugned addition, in the course of lower appellate proceedings, is not sustainable in law. The learned CIT(A)/NFAC's impugned findings are hereby reversed therefore. 5. This assessee's appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th August, 2025 Sd/- (SAT…

MAHARIVA PUPIL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. CIT(A)- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the assessee’s instant twin quantum appeals

ITA 7255/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Akshit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(23)(C)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(ii)

…ting the assessee’s exemption claim, already forming subject of adjudication; and, therefore, not sustainable as per CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 6 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Sardari lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 868 (Del) and CIT vs. Union Tyres (1999) 240 ITR 556 (Del.), adjudicating the very issue in assessee’s favour and against the department. The Revenue forgoing case law(s) admittedly does not deal with the issue of adding an altogether new head of income and the same stands distinguished therefore. We accordingly accept the assessee’s above extracted substantive grounds nos. 1 to 5 in very terms to…

MAHARIVA PUPIL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, NOIDA

In the result, the assessee’s instant twin quantum appeals

ITA 7254/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Akshit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(23)(C)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(ii)

…ting the assessee’s exemption claim, already forming subject of adjudication; and, therefore, not sustainable as per CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 6 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Sardari lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 868 (Del) and CIT vs. Union Tyres (1999) 240 ITR 556 (Del.), adjudicating the very issue in assessee’s favour and against the department. The Revenue forgoing case law(s) admittedly does not deal with the issue of adding an altogether new head of income and the same stands distinguished therefore. We accordingly accept the assessee’s above extracted substantive grounds nos. 1 to 5 in very terms to…

Showing 1–20 of 135 · Page 1 of 7