Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar

1 SCC 591Reported decision1985#393 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar authority for?

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

225

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar · Chenniyappa Mudiliar · Section 33(4) Income Tax Act 1922 · appellate tribunal duties · appeal dismissal for absence · appeal disposal on merits · natural justice appellate proceedings · opportunity of being heard · right to be heard appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 250(6)Section 250(4)Section 1922Section 33(4) of the Income Tax ActSection 250(4) of the Income Tax ActSection 250(6) of the Income Tax ActSection 1963

Issues it is cited on

section 33(4)section 33section 250(4)rule of consistencyspeaking ordersection 25opportunity of being heardsection 250assistant commissionerpersoncompanyindia

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar

Vivek Dhariwal, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur

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

ITA 397/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 250Section 250(4)Section 69A

…r Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 8 ITA.No.397/RPR/2025 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Mahendra Purushottam Naik Gaunekar, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

Accordingly. The ground thus stands allowed

ITA 12/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

…sdictional High Court in the case of ‘Vijay S Kulkarni Vs ITAT, Pune’ [2025, 171 Taxmann.com 696], reiterating the principle laid by Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘Delhi Transport Corp. Vs DTC Mazdoor Union’ [1999, AIR 564 SC] and ‘CIT Vs Chenniyappa Mudiliar’ [1969, 1 SCC 591] have categorically held that, adjudication by appellate authorities without due cognizance to material vis-à- vis submission made there before would be violative of basic principle of natural justice & devoid of representation, therefore deserves to be set-aside. ITAT-Panaji Page 15 of 16 Mahendra Purushottam Naik Gaunekar Vs ITO ITA No.: 012/PA…

Ram Bishal Sharma, Bhilai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bhilai

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

ITA 341/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.341/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ram Bishal Sharma Plot No.211/3, Vip Nagar, Risali Bhilai (C.G.)-490 006 Pan: Bocps4143F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri A.K Pansari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Dinesh Kumar Mishra, Kawardha, Kabirdham vs. ITO-1(3), Bhilai, (Erstwhile ITO Ward Kawardha)

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 345/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 345/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Tanjmay Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 194CSection 250

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 347/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 346/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Shyam Kumar Netam, Mahasamund vs. ACIT, Mahasamund

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 376/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Raipur24 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.374, 375 & 376/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shyam Kumar Netam Rajasevaiya Pithoura, Ward No.3, Mahasamund-493 551 (C.G.) Pan: Apspn2061H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Shyam Kumar Netam, Mahasamund vs. ACIT, Mahasamund

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur24 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.374, 375 & 376/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shyam Kumar Netam Rajasevaiya Pithoura, Ward No.3, Mahasamund-493 551 (C.G.) Pan: Apspn2061H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Shyam Kumar Netam, Mahasamund vs. ACIT, Mahasamund

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 374/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Raipur24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.374, 375 & 376/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Shyam Kumar Netam Rajasevaiya Pithoura, Ward No.3, Mahasamund-493 551 (C.G.) Pan: Apspn2061H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Sukhdev Singh Joshi, Jagdalpur, Bastar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Jagdalpur

ITA 174/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 173 & 174/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on Sukhdev Singh Joshi vs. ITO, Ward, Jagdalpur merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of th…

Sukhdev Singh Joshi, Jagdalpur, Bastar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Jagdalpur

ITA 173/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 173 & 174/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on Sukhdev Singh Joshi vs. ITO, Ward, Jagdalpur merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of th…

Neelam Rai, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 97/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 97/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 15lSection 250Section 69Section 69A

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Moti Aloo Bhandar, Korba vs. Income Tax Officer-1, Korba

ITA 340/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 340/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 40A(3)

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is 11 Moti Aloo Bhandar vs. ITO-1, Korba disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appel…

Income Tax Officer-1(3), Bhilai vs. Ramandeep Singh Sohi, Durg

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

ITA 268/RPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.268/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Income Tax Officer-1(3), Bhilai (C.G.)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Vineet Singh Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., Bilaspur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Bilaspur

ITA 239/RPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 239/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 269SSection 271DSection 275

…fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is 11 Vineet Singh Construction Company Private Limited vs. JCIT, Range-1, Bilaspur disposed off on merits and not…

Subedar Pathak, Gorakhpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

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

ITA 338/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.338/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Subedar Pathak Devnagari, Near Indian Oil Petrol Pump, Almunium Factory Road, Gorakhpur (U.P)-273- 001 Pan: Apspp4726M ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 250

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Maa Harsidhhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bilaspur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bilaspur

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

ITA 167/RPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.167/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Private Limited H No. Peepal 1/83, Housing Board Colony, Boriyakala, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aagcm7052H

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Sunil Kumar Rohda, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

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

ITA 119/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.119/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sunil Kumar Rohda Vasnmal Rohda Building, Main Road, Tilda, Raipur (C.G.)-493 114 Pan: Acmpr7739P

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Rajkumar Thadwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Raipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.257/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Rajkumar Thadwani 1-Raju Krishi Kendra, Amardeep Talkies Road, Banstal, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt0267A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Moolchand Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

…e fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…

Veer Project, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur

ITA 332/RPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 332/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 127(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…f the Constitution of India. 9 Veer Project vs. ACIT-1(1), Raipur 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case had referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar 1969 1 SCC 591, wherein the Supreme Court in interpreting the section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 has held that the appellate tribunal was bound to give a proper decision on question of fact as well as law, which can only be done if the appeal is disposed off on merits and not dismissed owing to the absence of the appellant. Reverting to the facts of the pr…