Smt. Mishingar Kaur v. Central Government

104 ITR 120High Court1976#5251 most cited

What is Smt. Mishingar Kaur v. Central Government authority for?

The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) has the power to conduct further inquiries, permit fresh grounds of appeal, and raise new points during the disposal of an appeal, irrespective of Rule 46A.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smt. Mishingar Kaur · Central Government · 104 ITR 120 · Section 250 · Rule 46A · Appellate Assistant Commissioner · power to inquire · fresh grounds of appeal · new points

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 115BBESection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 46ashell companysource of sourcesection 250(4)section 246addition under section 68admission of additional evidencesection 41principal commissioner of income-taxrule 46ashare application moneydocuments seized

Judgments citing Smt. Mishingar Kaur v. Central Government

DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. KAMAL JEWELLERS, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 161/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Sahini, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 68

…on of the original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer could have done, the appellate authority also could do." [Emphasis supplied] Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Smt. Mohindar Kaur vs. Central Government reported at [1976] 104 ITR 120 (ALL.) has held as under: “The AAC could while disposing of an appeal, make such inquiry as he thought fit. He could permit a fresh or new ground to be raised in the appeal. No part of rule 46A whittles down or impairs the power to make further inquiry conferred upon the AAC by section 250. Similarly, sub- section (5) of the said section confers…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S. ACE INFRACITY DEVELOPERS PVRIVATE LTD, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4104/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year 2022-23] Dcit Vs M/S. Ace Infracity Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Plot No. Ib, Gautam Budh A.R.T.O Complex, Nagar-201301 Sector-33, Noida-201301. Pan-Aakca8693E Appellant Respondent

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 68Section 69A

…original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer could have done, the appellate authority also could do." [Emphasis supplied] (p. 673) Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Smt. Mishingar Kaur vs. Central Government reported at (1976) 104 ITR 120 (ALL.) has held as under: "The AAC could while disposing of an appeal, make such inquiry as he thought fit. He could permit a fresh or new ground to be raised in the appeal. No part of rule 46A whittles down or impairs the power to make further inquiry conferred upon the AAC by section 250. Similarly, sub-section (5) of the said section confers a…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S ACE MEGA STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4115/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4067/Del/2025 2019-20 M/S. Ace Mega Dcit/Acit Structures Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D M/S. Ace Mega 2. 4115/Del/2025 2019-20 Dcit, Structures Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1, A.R.T.O Complex, Sector-33, I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida-201301. Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D Appellant By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Virsain Aggarwal, Itp Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.11.2025

Section 147Section 68

…original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer could have done, the appellate authority also could do." [Emphasis supplied] (p. 673) Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Smt. Mishingar Kaur vs. Central Government reported at (1976) 104 ITR 120 (ALL.) has held as under: "The AAC could while disposing of an appeal, make such inquiry as he thought fit. He could permit a fresh or new ground to be raised in the appeal. No part of rule 46A whittles down or impairs the power to make further inquiry conferred upon the AAC by section 250. Similarly, sub-section (5) of the said section confers a…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S BRIGHT BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4106/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year 2021-22] Dcit Vs M/S. Bright Buildtech Pvt.Ltd., Central Circle -1, D-35, Anand Vihar & Vihar, A.R.T.O Complex, Sector-33, Anand Vihar, S.O-East Delhi, Noida-201301. Delhi-110092 Pan-Aaccb7981J Appellant Respondent

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer could have done, the appellate authority also could do." [Emphasis supplied] (p. 673) Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Smt. Mishingar Kaur vs. Central Government reported at (1976) 104 ITR 120 (ALL.) has held as under: "The AAC could while disposing of an appeal, make such inquiry as he thought fit. He could permit a fresh or new ground to be raised in the appeal.No part of rule 46A whittles down or impairs the power to make further inquiry conferred upon the AAC by section 250. Similarly, sub-section (5) of the said section confers a…

ACE MEGA STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT/ACIT CEN CIR, NOIDA, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4067/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4067/Del/2025 2019-20 M/S. Ace Mega Dcit/Acit Structures Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D M/S. Ace Mega 2. 4115/Del/2025 2019-20 Dcit, Structures Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1, A.R.T.O Complex, Sector-33, I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida-201301. Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D Appellant By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Virsain Aggarwal, Itp Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.11.2025

Section 147Section 68

…original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer could have done, the appellate authority also could do." [Emphasis supplied] (p. 673) Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Smt. Mishingar Kaur vs. Central Government reported at (1976) 104 ITR 120 (ALL.) has held as under: "The AAC could while disposing of an appeal, make such inquiry as he thought fit. He could permit a fresh or new ground to be raised in the appeal. No part of rule 46A whittles down or impairs the power to make further inquiry conferred upon the AAC by section 250. Similarly, sub-section (5) of the said section confers a…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4117/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4116/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4108/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIA vs. M/S AJAY REALCON PVT. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3560/DEL/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3559/DEL/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3558/DEL/2025[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ACE RESIDENCY PVT. LTD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3493/DEL/2025[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, NFAC

ITA 400/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Santosh Kumar Shukla V. The Assessment Unit 11A/141, Vrindavan Colony Nfac Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Bawps5372J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shalabh Singh, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.03.2025 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Was An Employee Of Planning Research & Action Division Of State Planning Institute, Since 1993. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice Under Section 148A(B) Of The Act, Vide Dated 16.03.2022 For The Reason That The Assessee Had Made Cash Deposits/Time Deposits In His Bank Account. In Response To Notice Under Section Under Section 148 Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.04.2022, Declaring A Total Income Of

For Appellant: Shri Shalabh Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151ASection 69Section 69A

…the examination of any witness to enable him to dispose of the appeal. Even circular no. 108 dated 20.3.1973 explaining the amendment pertaining to introduction of rule 46A echoes the same view. The Allahabad High Court in Smt. Mohindar Kaur vs. Central Govt. 104 ITR 120 (All) prompted the Hon'ble High Court to hold that prior to enactment of rule 46A, the appellant had no right to adduce additional evidence. The CIT(A) could permit the production of additional evidence if he thought it was necessary to enable him to dispose of the appeal or if he thought it fit to make further inquiry, but under rule 46A(1), the…

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI vs. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3559/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…ucing further evidence in support of the evidence made by him. The Pragati Power Corporation vs. ACIT power of the First Appellate Authority conferred by section 250 is not affected or disturbed by Rule 46A refer Smt Mohinder Kaur vs Central Government (1976) 104 ITR 120 (ALL)). Infact, Rule 46A (4) specifically lays down that its provisions shall not affect the power of the First Appellate Authority to call for the production of any document or the examination by him of any witness in order to enable him to dispose off the appeal before him or for any other substantial cause. It means that Ld. CIT(A) was well wi…

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUNELVELI vs. ESAKKIMUTHU MUTHUVEL IYAPPAN, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 794/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.794/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Esakkimuthu Muthuvel Iyappan, Income Tax, No.4, Highways Road, Circle 1, Tisayanvilai, Tirunelveli 627 011. Tirunelveli 627 657. [Pan : Arupm 4796J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tion under rule 46A(3) of the rules is much authority u/s250(4)’. This interpretation of Kolkata Tribunal is contrary to the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court. It was observed by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Smt. Mohinder Kaur v. Central Government (104 ITR 120 All) as under- "Sub-rule (1) of the said rule lays down the circumstances in which alone the appellant is entitled to produce additional evidence. Sub-section (4) preserves the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to make further inquiry as contemplated by section 250 of the Act. Thus, it is clear that no part of rule 46A whittles down…

DCIT CIRCLE 13(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NANDANBALA COMMERCIALS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesse is also dismissed

ITA 1134/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Income Tax Circle 13(2)(2) Private Limited Room No. 452, 4 Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sanjay Infraspace Limited) Aayakar Bhavan, 1401-A, Wing One Bkc, M.K. Road, Plot No. C-66, G-Block, Mumbai – 400020 Bkc, Bandra-East Mumbai -400 092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aavcs1575L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: HM Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(ii)

…the following judicial pronouncements for admitting the same as additional evidences: “i. Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah Vs. CIT [231 ITR 01] (Bom HC) ii. CIT Vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair [265 ITR 217] (Ker HC) iii. Smt. Mohindar Kuar Vs. Central Government And Ors [104 ITR 120] (All HC)” After hearing both the sides and the submission of the assessee these copies of documents are also admitted as additional evidences in order to decide the issue in appeal on merit. P a g e | 14 ITA No.1134/Mum/2023 CO 67/Mum/2023 DCIT 13(2)(2) Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Pvt. Ltd. 6. Heard both the sides and perused the material on rec…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2455/MUM/2023[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…ioned in paragraph number 5.2 of the order. Therefore such additional evidences were admitted following the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 231 ITR 01, honourable Kerala High Court in 265 ITR 217, and honourable Allahabad High Court in 104 ITR 120. Further, the addition was also deleted, as the amount of loan was not received during the year but in assessment year 2014 – 15. 036. On hearing the parties we find that the learned CIT – A is within his powers to admit the additional evidences for which the learned CIT – A has recorded the reasons which are not assailed by the revenue before us…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1136/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…ioned in paragraph number 5.2 of the order. Therefore such additional evidences were admitted following the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 231 ITR 01, honourable Kerala High Court in 265 ITR 217, and honourable Allahabad High Court in 104 ITR 120. Further, the addition was also deleted, as the amount of loan was not received during the year but in assessment year 2014 – 15. 036. On hearing the parties we find that the learned CIT – A is within his powers to admit the additional evidences for which the learned CIT – A has recorded the reasons which are not assailed by the revenue before us…

MUKESH SHIVDAS SONAR,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL-3, THANE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1806/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2022AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…250(4), the Ld. CIT(A) was empowered to make such further inquiry as he thinks fit and such power being quasi judicial power, it was incumbent on him to exercise the same if the facts and circumstances justify. 9. In Smt. Mohindar Kaur Vs Central Govt. (1976) 104 ITR 120”, “Section 250(5) confers power upon Ld. CIT(A) to permit the appellant to raise a fresh point which has not been even touched by rule 46A. The Court finally held that Rule 46A is not ultra virus section 250 or 251 of the Act. On the contrary, it gives a right to the appellant to produce additional evidence which was earlier not available to him.…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2