ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

52 ITR 335Supreme Court of India1964#1107 most cited

What is ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das authority for?

The Supreme Court clarified that an appellate authority's 'finding' must be essential for disposing of the appeal for the relevant assessment year, not an incidental observation about another year's income. Appellate authorities cannot issue directions on matters not directly arising in the appeal for the specific assessment year, especially regarding escaped income, which has separate statutory mechanisms.

100

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das · 52 ITR 335 SC · Section 150 Income Tax Act · appellate authority powers · finding or direction · reassessment limitation period · Section 251 · Section 33(4) · scope of appeal order · escaped income · previous year distinct unit

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 150Section 149Section 251Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 150(1)section 150(2)section 33(4)section 150section 245hasection 147(a)true and full disclosuresection 10(2)section 34(1)section 33section 18section 148(2)

Judgments citing ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

ACIT-19(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RISHABH AVNISH MODY, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8101/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
For Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad (CIT DR)
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 56Section 68

…e income of the Hindu undivided family operated to lift the bar of limitation as regards the assessment of income of the separated members by the application of the principle of the judgments of this court in Income-tax Officer v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 and N. Kt. Sivalingam Chettiarv. Commissioner of Income-tax [1967] 66 ITR 586 . In our opinion, the orders passed by the income-tax authorities and confirmed by the Tribunal suffer from a fundamental defect. As we have already stated, Karuppan Chettiar submitted returns of his income in his individual capacity for the years 1950-51, 1951-52 and 19…

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2954/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

…Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the following decisions submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) do not have power to issue directions to the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s.148 of the Act :- i. ITO vs Murlidhar Bhagwan Das: [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) ii. Munish Chander Khurana vs ITO: iii. DCIT vs Sh Vaibhav Banka Aakarshan: [2025] 176 taxmann.com 362 (Jpr Trib) iv. G.S. Atwal & Co (Engg.) Pvt Ltd vs DCIT: ITA No.1937/Kol/2019 (Kol 16 Trib) v. ITO vs Sri Biswajit Chatterjee: ITA No.565/Kol/2013 (Kol Trib) vi. Marubeni India (P) Ltd vs CIT: [2010] 236 CTR 234 (Del) 4. On the other hand th…

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2953/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

…Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the following decisions submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) do not have power to issue directions to the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s.148 of the Act :- i. ITO vs Murlidhar Bhagwan Das: [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) ii. Munish Chander Khurana vs ITO: iii. DCIT vs Sh Vaibhav Banka Aakarshan: [2025] 176 taxmann.com 362 (Jpr Trib) iv. G.S. Atwal & Co (Engg.) Pvt Ltd vs DCIT: ITA No.1937/Kol/2019 (Kol 16 Trib) v. ITO vs Sri Biswajit Chatterjee: ITA No.565/Kol/2013 (Kol Trib) vi. Marubeni India (P) Ltd vs CIT: [2010] 236 CTR 234 (Del) 4. On the other hand th…

MRS. DEEPALI VIKKI AJMERA,MULUND vs. ITO WARD 27(1)(1), MUMBAI, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4981/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2020-21 Mrs. Deepali Vikki Ajmera, Ito Ward 27 (1) (1), 5Th Floor, Prem Ratna Building, Tower 6, Vashi Station Ambedkar, Road Opp. Balaji Vs. Complex, Navi Mumbai – Temple, Mulund West, Mumbai 400703. – 400080. Pan – Agvps 7279 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Piyush Bafna, Ca (Virtually Appear) Revenue By : Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 281 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal, On Which The Assessee Has Claimed As Under :- Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay 1, Mrs. Deepali Vikki Ajmera, Age About 45 Years, Residing At 5Th Floor, Prem Ratna Building, Ambedkar Road, Opp Balaji Temple

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Bafna, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, SR. D.R
Section 250

…. 2009-10). It is well settled that each year is separate and self-contained period. Income Tax is annual in its structure and organization. We take strength from decisions Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT[1953] 24 ITR 506(SC); ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC); CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44/54 Taxman 499 (SC) and CIT v. Basant Rai Takht Singh [1933] 1 ITR 197 (SC) for the proposition that each 'previous year' is a distinct unit of time for the purposes of assessment and further, that the profits made; and the liabilities of losses made before or after the relevant previous year…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 712/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…ubstitute a fresh route of taxation by way of Section 153C—a course\nof action that is entirely outside his jurisdiction under Sections 250/251.\n2.7 Further, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v.\nMurlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble\nSupreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the\n1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the\nappeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 710/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

….) annul the assessment;\n\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The\nissue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt\nwith in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335\n(SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the\nappellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254\nof the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any\ndirection on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides\nseparate mechanisms (like Section 3…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 709/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…ubstitute a fresh route of taxation by way of Section 153C—a course\nof action that is entirely outside his jurisdiction under Sections 250/251.\n2.7 Further, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v.\nMurlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble\nSupreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the\n1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the\nappeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms to deal with\nes…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Mahendra Kumar Goyal ACIT/DCIT Vs. Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Central Circle-03, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asses…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 497/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Mahendra Kumar Goyal ACIT/DCIT Vs. Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Central Circle-03, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asses…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 496/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Mahendra Kumar Goyal ACIT/DCIT Vs. Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Central Circle-03, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asses…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 493/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Mahendra Kumar Goyal ACIT/DCIT Vs. Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Central Circle-03, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asses…

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 303/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…53A\nproceeding, he “substituted” a different route (i.e Section 147) to tax that\nincome. This exceeded the mandate of Section 250/251.\n\n2.6.vii.\nFurther, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v.\nMurlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein\nHon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions\n(Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act)\ndo not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on\nmatters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate\nmechanisms (like Section 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 302/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…v.) annul the assessment;\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 301/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…ction 153A proceeding, he “substituted” a different route (i.e Section 147) to tax that income. This exceeded the mandate of Section 250/251. 2.6.vii. Further, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 300/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…v.) annul the assessment;\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 299/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

….)\nannul the assessment;\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 298/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…v.) annul the assessment;\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 297/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…) annul the assessment;\n\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. USHA BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 296/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

….)\nannul the assessment;\nThus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law.\nThe issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already\nbeen dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das\n[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court\nunderscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act,\nanalogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the\nappellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in\nthe appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like\nSection 3…

Showing 1–20 of 100 · Page 1 of 5

ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das (52 ITR 335) — Cited in 100 Judgments | BharatTax