Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 688Supreme Court of India1991#29 most cited

What is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

1,372

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT · 187 ITR 688 · CIT(A) powers · Section 251 · appellate authority · new source of income · assessment confined to original items · additional legal grounds · Section 143(3) validity · Section 153C · Income Tax Act 1961

Also reported as

53 Taxmann 85

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

block periodsection 158bsection 119section 158section 127income escaping assessmentsection 149loose paperssection 132achief commissionersection 151section 92ca

Judgments citing Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

Reena Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd, Panaji vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…the Tribunal so long as they arise from the subject matter of the proceedings and not necessarily from the subject matter raised in the memo of appeal. The reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 wherein the Apex Court permitted the appellant to raise an additional ground for the first time before the appellate authority claiming deduction of purchase tax liability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (…

Reena Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd, Panaji vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…the Tribunal so long as they arise from the subject matter of the proceedings and not necessarily from the subject matter raised in the memo of appeal. The reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 wherein the Apex Court permitted the appellant to raise an additional ground for the first time before the appellate authority claiming deduction of purchase tax liability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (…

Reena Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd, Panaji vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…the Tribunal so long as they arise from the subject matter of the proceedings and not necessarily from the subject matter raised in the memo of appeal. The reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 wherein the Apex Court permitted the appellant to raise an additional ground for the first time before the appellate authority claiming deduction of purchase tax liability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (…

Reena Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd, Panaji vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…the Tribunal so long as they arise from the subject matter of the proceedings and not necessarily from the subject matter raised in the memo of appeal. The reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 wherein the Apex Court permitted the appellant to raise an additional ground for the first time before the appellate authority claiming deduction of purchase tax liability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (…

Nandlal Commercial Private Limited, Howrah vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer, Nandlal Commercial Private Ward 3(1), Kolkata Limited, Kolkata Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 1, Mahendra Nath Roy, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Bye Lane, Kolkata-711101, Kolkata-700069 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcn2898K Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, DR
Section 120Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 68

…h has not been raised before either of the authorities below but since, the issue raised goes to the root of the matter and is a legal issue respectfully following the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688(SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC), we are inclined to admit the same for adjudication. Nandlal Commercial Private Limited; A.Y. 2021-13 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that admittedly the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued by ITO, Ward 44(4),…

Smt. Anita Devi, Patna vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

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

ITA 22/PAT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153D

…ts is required to be done from any quarter whatsoever and therefore, the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The ld. AR in defense of his arguments relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688(SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). 04. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the issue was not raised before either of authorities below and therefore, may be restored to any of the authorities below for adjudication. 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record…

Smt. Anita Devi, Patna vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

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

ITA 20/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm**

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153D

…ts is required to be done from any quarter whatsoever and therefore, the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The ld. AR in defense of his arguments relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688(SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). - 04. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the issue was not raised before either of authorities below and therefore, may be restored to any of the authorities below for adjudication. - 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on reco…

Smt. Anita Devi, Patna vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

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

ITA 17/PAT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153D

…ts is required to be done from any quarter whatsoever and therefore, the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The ld. AR in defense of his arguments relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688(SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). 04. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the issue was not raised before either of authorities below and therefore, may be restored to any of the authorities below for adjudication. 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record…

Satish Narayan Tarale, Belgavi vs. Intl.Taxation Ward, Panaji

ITA 55/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 055/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Satish Narayan Tarale 35, Laxmi Narayan Niwas, 2Nd Stage, Hanuman Nagar, Belgaum-590001. Pan : Afkpt0032Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenges Din & Order No Itba/Ast/F/144/2024- 25/1072202908(1) Dt. 15/01/2025 Passed By The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] U/S 144 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Anent To Assessment Year 2019-20 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 253(6)Section 3Section 4Section 6(6)Section 69A

…we deem it fit to admit in light of judicial precedents laid in ‘Jaora Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd v CIT’ reported in 124 ITR 482 (MP), and ‘CIT v Western Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd.’ reported at 156 ITR 54 (Bom) and ‘Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v CIT’ find placed in 187 ITR 688(SC) and ‘Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT’ reported in 199 ITR 351(Bom), ergo same stands admitted for adjudication. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 15 Satish Narayan Tarale Vs ITO ITA Nos.055/PAN/2025 AY: 2019-20 15. In adjudicating the issues we note that, in terms of section 139(1)(b) of the Act, a person being other than a company or a firm is n…

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)

…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 India Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688. The least that was expected from the Ld.CIT(A) was at least to give cognizance to the submission of the assessee reproduced by the AO in his penalty order and thereafter to adjudicate the issue 7. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Ahmedabad in Multivision Infotech Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, (2017) 88 taxmann.c…

M/S Karia Builders, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(3), Pune

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

ITA 2401/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Karia Builders Ito, Ward 14(3), Pune 402, Konark Indrayu, Kondhwa, Vs. Pune – 411048 Pan: Aadfk5220B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)Section 296S

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 M/s. Karia Builders ITO, Ward 14(3), Pune 402, Konark Indrayu, Kondhwa, Vs. Pune – 411048 PAN: AADFK5220B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanket M Joshi Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 17-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 23-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.09.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. Facts o…

Subhendu Nandy, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(2), Burdwan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2022/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Subhendu Nandy Ito, Wd 2(2), Burdwan C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Aaykar Bhavan, Burdwan, Advocates Sagar Mansion, 2. Kachari Road, Court Compound, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite P.O. & P.S. Burdwan, Dist. Vs. Nos, 202 & 203, Hare Street, Purba, Bardhaman-713101, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aegpn0674P Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 69A

…dditional ground for the first time before any appellate authority and therefore, the same may be admitted and decided. In defense of his argument the ld. AR relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688(SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). 04. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the issue was not raised before the other authorities below and therefore, may be restored to any of the authorities below for adjudication. 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record…

Shruthi Kishore, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Bengaluru

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

ITA 550/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Upadhya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate for Standing
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69ASection 80T

…r the Act. 9.3 In addition, the learned AR argued that appellate authorities have the power to admit new claims, even if they were not raised before the AO, as supported by the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling in Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd reported in 349 ITR 336. 9.4 In conclusion, the ld. AR requested the Tribunal to delete the addition of ₹10,00,000 as the amount represent as wedding gifts which . Page 8 of 11 is not taxable and consequently quash the CIT(A)’s direction for unnecessary donor’s verifica…

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)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Creative 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 Appellant by : Shri Jitendra Sanghvi,AR Respondent by : Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr. DR) Date…

Ashok Bharti Goswami, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1272/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and all…

Ashish Ramesh Oswal, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Pune

ITA 1271/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and al…

Adish Shantilal Solanki, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Pune

ITA 1270/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and all…

Chitra Narendra Parmar, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1269/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and all…

Ramlal Bhikulal Shah, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1268/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: S/Shri Kishor B Phadke &For Respondent: S/Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT &
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and all…

Deepak Kantilal Jain, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Pune

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1267/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153C

…are already available on record. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the admission of the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 14. After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and all…