Ramanlal Kamdar v. CIT

108 ITR 73High Court1977#5169 most cited

What is Ramanlal Kamdar v. CIT authority for?

An appeal before the Tribunal is incompetent if the assessee is not aggrieved by any part of the order of the lower authority. This principle applies when there is no 'cause of action' arising from the order.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ramanlal Kamdar v CIT · appeal before Tribunal · incompetent appeal · aggrieved party · cause of action · section 154 · rectification proceedings · ITAT · CIT(A)

Issues it is cited on

appeal before the tribunalpersoncompanysection 143(3)nfactotal incomebusinessinterest

Judgments citing Ramanlal Kamdar v. CIT

G.K.Mathanagopal, Pollachi vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2031/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. O.K. Narayanan & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Mr. Murugeshan, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Vidisha Kalra, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…had agreed to the addition made towards disallowance cash payments made to agriculturists u/s.40A(3) of the Income-tax Act. 5.1 This issue is squarely covered by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ramanlal Kamdar vs. CIT reported in 108 ITR 73(Mad). The facts of the case cited supra decided by the jurisdictional High Court is that in the original assessment for the assessment year 1962-63 a mistake had crept in while working out interest under section 139(1)(iii). Thereafter, the ITO issued a notice to the assesse, proposing to rectify the 7 ITA 2031/Mds/12 mistake under section 154 an…

Octant Interactive Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 4(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 6230/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6230/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2009-10) Octant Interactive Technologies बनाम/ Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(4), Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. (Formerly Known As M/S Octant Industries Limited), Float No.2, Sudershan Building, Road No.4, Perstomsagar, Chembur, Mumbai-400089 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 40

…that the assessee has agreed to the addition and it cannot be said that the assessee is aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. We find merit in the contentions of the ld. DR. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Ramanlal Kamdar vs. CIT, 108 ITR 73 (Mad.) has held that “the appeal shall become incompetent if the assessee could not be said to have been aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer or Appellate Authority. Similar view has been expressed by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT V/s Indian Express (Madurai) Pvt. Limited reported in 140 ITR 705 (Mad). Since the assess…