“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)

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(3), Nagpur vs. Naresh Narayandas Ramrakhyani, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 633/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in setting aside the assessment order as per the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the assessee was responsive during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. Any other ground that may be raised

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(3), Nagpur vs. Naresh Narayandas Ramrakhyani, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

Smt. Pinky Jhawar, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and Ground No

ITA 552/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 552/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Aggrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6N, Bangalore

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

ITA 933/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 14A

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

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6, Bangalore

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

ITA 932/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 14A

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Shillong, Shillong vs. The Meghalaya Cooperative Apex Bank Limited, Shillong

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross

ITA 50/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Manomohan Das & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 36Section 40

manner in which it has been done, could be legally tenable or not. For adjudicating on this, the provisions of Section 251(1) of the Act deserve to be recapitulated as under: “251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers ... left the nitty-gritty to the assessing officer. It is felt that such action is not permissible after the amendment to the Section 251(1) of the Act (supra). Considerable strength is drawn from the case of Arun Kumar Bose vs. ITO reported in [2023] 458 ITR 32 (Calcutta) wherein

Sri Ram Constructions, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6 (5), Patna

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

ITA 353/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 43C

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

John Deere India Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. CIT(A), Dehi

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

ITA 2477/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2477/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., V The Commissioner Of Tower 14, Cyber City, S Income Tax(Appeals), Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Nfac, Delhi. Pune – 411013. Pan: Aaacj4233B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2014-15; Dated 27.09.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Using Same Statement Of Facts & Findings For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 Whereas The Statement Of Facts & Findings Are Not Relevant At All For Assessment Year 2014-15. Ita No.2477/Pun/2024 [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 250Section 90

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 ITA No.2477/PUN/2024 [A] 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

Rekh Chand Nahta, Jagdalpur, Bastar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Jagdalpur, Bastar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 3/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.03/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rekh Chand Nahta House No.97, Gurudwara Road, Jagdalpur, Bastar-494 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aplpn0667E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Jagdalpur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 69A

situations where the assessee failed to comply with initial notices, in order to ensure principles of natural justice are followed. 6.1 Proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act w.e.f 01/10/2024 provides that in the case of appeal against an order of assessment made under section ... refer the matter back to the Assessing officer for making a fresh assessment. 6.2 In view of the power conferred under proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, I hereby set aside the assessment made u/s 144 and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making

Mrs. Neeta Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 6416/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Dhiraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 148Section 251(1)

five floors in the house property (including basement), to the tune of Rs.26,50,000/- on the one hand. We further invoked his section 251(1) enhancement jurisdiction for holding the assessee’s residential asset sold/transferred herein in A.Y. 2009-10 as a short term capital asset than claimed

Mrs. Neeta Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 2186/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Dhiraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 148Section 251(1)

Mrs. Neeta Gupta, New Delhi vs. CIT (Appeals)-Xxvi, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 5461/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Dhiraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 148Section 251(1)

Adidarshan Tradewing Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1716/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 250(6)Section 263Section 68

Laxmi Narayan Packaging Industries, Guwahati vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1), Guwahati

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

ITA 60/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 80

decision. (6A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) Page 10 of 13 I.T.A. No.: 60/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laxmi Narayan Packaging Industries. "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 ... 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

Mustafa Katthawala, Kota vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 1156/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 244ASection 45(3)

ACIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India ( Erstwhile Corporation Bank), Mumbai

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1228/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri.B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan S / Ms. LalithaFor Respondent: ShriAshish Heliwal, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A), was right in restoring the issue for examining it afresh, ignoring the facts section 251(1)(a) of the Act does not provide power to the Ld. CIT(A) for setting aside the matter? (x) Whether on the facts

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune vs. Bank of Maharashtra, Pune

ITA 428/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)

nature. 2. On the facts and the circumstances and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not complying with the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act and send the matter back to AO for verification on the issue of disallowance of write back of provision ... facts and the circumstances and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in not complying with the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act and send the matter back to the AO for verification on the issue of disallowance of write back provision for standard assets amounting

Bank of Maharashtra, Pune vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 259/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S Ananthan & Smt. Abarna CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)

Rani Garg, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 59/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 59 & 60/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Ito, Shri Rakesh Nagpal, Ward – 1, Vs House No. 39A, Model Town, Fatehabad. Fatehabad. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalpn1386K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 270A(2)

preliminary grievance is that ld. First Appellate Authority has set aside the assessment order by exercising the powers contemplated in provision of Section 251(1)(a) of the Act. The ld. Sr.DR submitted that in this case, assessment order has not been passed ex-parte or according to the best ... have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. We deem it appropriate to take note of relevant part of Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, which reads as under : “Powers of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) 251.(1) In disposing

Suryadeo Prasad, Siwan vs. ITO Ward-2 (3), Siwan

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

ITA 82/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A