“Section 251(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 251Section 251(1)929 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 251(1) is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688), cited in 1,372 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 251(1)

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 688 · 1991 · Supreme Court

1,372

citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

297 CTR 614 · 2017 · High Court

659

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution or default in appearance. Under Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits, even in an ex parte proceeding.

CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

44 ITR 891 · 1962 · Supreme Court

278

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot enhance an assessment by introducing a new source of income or by changing the head of income during appellate proceedings.

Skycell Communications Ltd. v. DCIT

251 ITR 53 · 2001 · High Court

253

citing judgments

Technical services involve human intervention and expertise, not just routine or machine-based operations. Routine customer support and standard facility provision through technology do not constitute technical services under the Act.

CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co.

251 ITR 864 · 2001 · High Court

240

citing judgments

An appellate authority cannot introduce a new source of income that was not considered by the Assessing Officer; taxability of new sources should be addressed through reassessment provisions like Section 147/148 or revision under Section 263.

CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd.

326 ITR 251 · 2010 · High Court

196

citing judgments

If approval from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for an in-house R&D centre is granted during the previous year, the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) for the entire expenditure incurred during that year.

Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT

231 ITR 1 · 1998 · High Court

186

citing judgments

The first appellate authority must admit additional evidence if it is necessary for determining the true state of affairs and preventing undue hardship or a failure of justice, even without a specific request and particularly when the case falls under Rule 46A(1)(c).

Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT

266 ITR 99 · 2004 · Supreme Court

181

citing judgments

The Revenue cannot take a conflicting stand from what it had earlier accepted in a previous assessment year without compelling justification. This principle of consistency applies to various issues, including the treatment of customs duty in closing inventory.

Judgments citing Section 251(1)

Mukesh Agarwal, Agra vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(2), Agra

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 68/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

possession of ld. CIT(Appeals), he was not justified to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer by resorting to proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 5. Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue supported the impugned order. 2 | P a g e 6. There is no quarrel ... legal aspect that w.e.f. 01.10.2024, ld. CIT(Appeals) is empowered vide proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer in a case when the assessment order is passed u/s. 144 of the Act. It also transpires from the perusal

Amina Aslam Qureshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 769/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 251(1)Section 274Section 56(2)(vii)

dt.25.05.2023 for A.Y.2017-18, in terms of his grounds of appeal, is hereby set-aside as per the proviso to section 251(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961. The Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment on all the issues taken up in his assessment order, after allowing proper opportunity

Dodhia Chem Tex Private Limited, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 765/Mum/2025 is dismissed

ITA 765/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedodhia Chem Tex Private Vs Dcit-Cc-3, Thane Room No.12, A-Wing, 6Th Floor, Limited, 98/2, Dodhia House New Mavji Ashar It Park, Thane (West)-400 Compound, Narpoli Behind 604 Ratan Talkies, Bhiwandi, 421 302 Pan : Aajcs0580R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Simran DhavanFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal,(CIT DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)

that the assessment was completed exparte under section 144 and additions were made by making disallowances under different heads. After the amendment to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Ld.CIT(A) is empowered to set aside the assessment order for further adjudication to the Ld. AO. The observations ... appellant can file necessary documents and evidences on the issues involved in the appeal.In view of these facts and the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the impugned assessment order u/s. 144 of the Act is being set-aside and the matter is referred back

Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur

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

ITA 19/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT a

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. (6A)……………. (7)……………. Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) Section 251(1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers - 13 Sh. Panka Mani Khulshrestha vs. ITO (a) in an appeal against ... stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance

Govindbhai Bhavandas Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 4(2)(2), Ahmedabad (Existing ITO Ward 4(2)(1), Ahmedabad)

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 256/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Who Has Set Aside The Exparte Assessment Order Invoking Section 251(1)(A) Of The Act By Observing As Follows:

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 251(1)(a)Section 271FSection 69A

order. 3. Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has set aside the exparte assessment order invoking Section 251(1)(a) of the Act by observing as follows: “In appeal, inter-alia, appellant has stated that appellant was in the USA during financial year ... cases where assessment order was passed as best judgment case u/s 144 of the Act, the CIT(A) has been empowered in section 251(1)(a) to set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the AO for making a fresh assessment, in appellate orders passed

Shivajs Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Jodhpur

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

ITA 185/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Ble

Section 246ASection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CITT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance ... dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply dear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the OT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Bsnl Rttc Building vs. The Wardha District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd, Wardha

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 99/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

instruction of CBDT is mandatory procedure in nature. Hence, I find merit in the second contention of the appellant. 7.6 The provisions of section 251(1) (a) of the Act empowers the CIT (A) to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment order in the course of disposing the appeal

Maga Ram Choudhary, Pilerne vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

The appeal is ALLOWED for statistical purposes

ITA 4/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Maga Ram Choudhary 6-1, M/S Magan Mistry, Opp. Vasudev Marble, Pilerna Industrial Estate, Goa Pan:Afzpc2295M . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Panaji. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 251(1)Section 69A

making additions u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. NFAC. Pursuant to proviso to section 251(1) of the Act, the Ld. NFAC allowed the appeal of the assessee by remanding the matter back to the Ld. AO for de- novo assessment. Still aggrieved ... averred that, the assessment in this was framed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, in view of proviso to section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. NFAC flawlessly adjudicated the ex-parte assessment in a best possible manner by remanding the same for de-novo adjudication. We have

Ashok Tilak Sapra, Porvorim vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 12/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)

ITAT Rules-1963, perused the material placed on record. At the outset we note that, in view of newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act vide para 6 of the impugned order the Ld. NFAC has set-aside the ex-parte assessment order passed

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1542/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1541/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1540/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

grievously erred in law and or on facts in not set a siding the assessment as per Section 251(1)(a) as the assessment was concluded ex parte under section 144. 4.2 That in the law and/or on facts, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have set a side ... assessment as per Section 251(1)(a) as the assessment was concluded ex parte under section 144. 5.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and / or on facts in upholding the invocation of the provisions of Section 115BBE 5.2 That in the law and/or on facts

Nalini Vijay Shah, Satellite vs. Ward 3(1)(2) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1539/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Bhimashankar Ssk Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT- Circle-8, Pune

ITA 1147/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1147/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13 Bhimashankar Ssk Ltd., V The Acit, A/P. Pargaon, Tal.Ambegaon, S Circle-8, Pune. Dist-Pune – 412406. Pan: Aaaab0949G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hanmant Dattatry Dhavle – Ar Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 23.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law Of The Learned Nfac –Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Delhi, Has Erred In Disallowing & Adding Back An Amount Of Rs.42,23,17,760/- On Account F Excess Cane Price Paid Farmers.

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(19)Section 250Section 80ISection 80P(2)(d)

stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance ... dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise

Sharp Business Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 717/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Sh. Vinay Sharma, Dcit, Central Circle-18, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan: Bdqps4406L (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.60/Del/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita No.712/Del/2019] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Dcit, Sh. Vinay Sharma, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, Central Circle-18, Ghaziabad New Delhi Pan: Bdqps4406L (Appellant) (Respondent) With Ita Nos.716 & 717/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vs. Sh. Dheer Chand Sharma, Dcit, Central Circle-18, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan: Bdlps0502C (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. Nos.64 & 65/Del/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita Nos.716 & 717/Del/2019] Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vs. Dcit, Sh. Dheer Chand Sharma B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, Central Circle-18, Ghaziabad New Delhi Pan: Bdlps0502C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)

bogus, the CIT(A)’s action adding the above percentage of 2.5% representing the profit element therein, amounts to an enhancement under section 251(1)(a) of the Act which is not sustainable in law going by CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC); CIT Vs. Sardari

Sachin Pandurang Alhat, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2), Pune

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

ITA 8/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.8/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sachin Pandurang Alhat, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.202, Bld No.P6, A S Ward-10(2), Pune. Wing, Gandarwanagari, Pune – 412501. Pan:Ahepa6396E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S. Pathak & Mrs. Arrchena Sheety Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 05.11.2024 For Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Appellant Has Not Been Duly Represented By His Iip In The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & Have Again Not Been Duly

Section 148Section 250

stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance ... dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise

Sudha Ramani, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Chennai

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

ITA 3352/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3352/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sudha Ramani, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat A3, 862, Siddharth Manor, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Poonamallee High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Ahepr9857M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Raised 3 Grounds Of Appeal, Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 147Section 251(1)(a)

file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in view of the amendment brought in by way of insertion of first proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act and prayed to dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. 4 I.T.A. No.2380/Chny/24 7. Heard both the parties and perused ... matter to the file of the Assessing Officer in view of the amendment brought in by way of insertion of first proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. We note that the said amendment came into effect from 01.10.2024, wherein, the ld. CIT(A) has power to remand

Income Tax Officer-10(3)(1), Aaykar Bhavan vs. Pratham Internatonal Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 405/MUM/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2Section 251(1)Section 68

duly submitted response to every notice/letter/show cause notice issued by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, hence the provisions of section 251(1) of the Act are not applicable in the case of the assessee." 3. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Span India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 801/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 145Section 145(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN

Subrata Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 471/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)

shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. (6A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) "Section 251(1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers — (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm ... stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance