“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)

Rajasthan Jain Mitra Parishad, Ahmedabad vs. NFAC, Delhi, Jurisdictional AO: the ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 337/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

assessee. The power of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the power of Assessing Officer which even includes power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a)). The ld. CIT(A) is required to adjudicate the issues on merit in accordance with law , as is provided

Dharmendra Jinendra Jain, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 540/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rupesh R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)

Shan Exports, Mumbai vs. Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 448/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhrishan Exports Vs./ Central Circle (3)(4), 1/213, Navjivan Society, बनाम Mumbai Lamington Road, Room No. 1915, 19Th Floor, Mumbai-400008 Air India Bldg. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalfs008B Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms. Mona SolankiFor Respondent: Shri Nagnath Pasale

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 250Section 251(1)Section 68Section 69A

case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in changing the section 69A to Section 68 of the Act exercising section 251(1) powers. Your Honor, there is no such power provided by the law that Id. CIT(A) could change the provision of law qua the item

Enn Vee Holdings Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1195/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member, Sh

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1839/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member, Sh

Shrey Jitendra Panchal, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 330/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

power of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the power of Assessing Officer which even includes power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a)). The ld. CIT(A) is required to adjudicate the issues on merit in accordance with law , as is provided

Alkaben Ketulkumar Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 287/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

Assessing Officer. The power of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the power of Assessing Officer which even includes power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a)). The ld. CIT(A) is required to adjudicate the issues on merit in accordance with law , as is provided

Parry Infrastructure Co P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1653/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Philip George, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Assessing Officer may accept the Section 148/147 return of income without making any addition or disallowance; 2) The assessment is framed and the Section 251(1)(a) Assessing Officer makes certain additions or disallowances and in making such additions or disallowances, he deals with such item or items of income ... buttressed by the several decisions of various courts of law including the Apex court. The ld.CIT-DR took us through the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act and argued that the CIT(A) has given powers not only to confirm, reduce, or annul the assessment, but even

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Limited, Singapore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1711/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri Harsh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 74

annul the assessment while deciding the appeal u/s. 246A of the Act filed by the assessee which are within the purview of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) had also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case ... 1), Mumbai (ITA no.2366/Mum./2018), wherein it was held that the power of allowing withdrawal of appeal is not within the provision of section 251(1)(a) of the Act and has further held that the ld. CIT(A) has to decide the issue on the merits of the appeal

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Suisse (Singapore) Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1698/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri Harsh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 74

Prem Chand Yadav, Lucknow vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Lucknow - New

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

ITA 406/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2017-18 Prem Chand Yadav V. The Acit-1 1/374, Sector 1 Lucknow Gomti Nagar Extension Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Pan:Abqpy1283Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Dr Preeti Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 02 07 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr Preeti Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 68

points which arose for determination in the appellate proceedings, including on all the grounds of appeal. Moreover, the perusal of section 251(1)(a) and (b) and further the perusal of Explanation of section 251(2) shows that the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to apply his/her mind ... This non-application of mind is a contravention of statutory role of the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 251(2) of I.T. Act. Also, section 251(1)(a) provides that while disposing of an appeal against assessment order, Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul

Paragkumar Dipakkumar Khamar, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Mehsana

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

ITA 232/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144

with ld. CIT(A). The powers of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the powers of the AO including power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a)). The CIT(A) has power to make such inquiries as he thinks fit and may also direct AO to make such enquiries

Gopalkrishna Naginbhai Patel, Petlad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Petlad

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

ITA 545/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Against The Appellate Order Dated 8Th May, 2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income- Tax(Appeals),National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi( Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1052644110(1))

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

merit. The power of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the power of Assessing Officer which even includes power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a)). The ld. CIT(A) is required to adjudicate the issues on merit in accordance with law , as is provided ... with ld. CIT(A). The powers of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with the powers of the AO including power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a). The CIT(A) has power to make such inquiries as he thinks fit and may also direct AO to make such enquiries

B.K. Sales Corporation, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 36(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1498/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Madhumita Roym/S. B.K. Sales Corporation, Vs. Acit, Circle 36 (1), D-1, Gf 5, Virat Bhawan, New Delhi. Commercial Complex, Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi – 110 009. (Pan : Aaafb4846K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca Shri Ankur Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2024 Date Of Order : 26.06.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-12, New Delhi Dated 06.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. Revenue : Disallowance Of Service Charges/Commission Paid To Six Hufs Rs.3196047 – A. The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Ignored I. The Basic Fact Of The Assessee Being A Service Recipient Getting Such Services From Various Unrelated Entities.

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

income of the Appellant firm by Rs.1,95,39,767/- in respect of commission paid by it by resorting to the provisions of Section 251(1)(a) r.w.s. 251 (2) of the Act.” 4. Upon hearing both the parties, we admit the above additional ground as the same is legal

Medical Pollution Control Committee, Kanpur vs. ACIT, Central-1(2)(1), Kanpur

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

ITA 77/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2017-18 Medical Pollution Control V. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Committee Income Tax 21E Block, Panki Circle 1(2)(1) Kanpur City 208020 Kanpur Pan:Aaaac3243Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25 06 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25 06 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

points which arose for determination in the appellate proceedings, including on all the grounds of appeal. Moreover, the perusal of section 251(1)(a) and (b) and further the perusal of Explanation of section 251(2) shows that the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to apply his/her mind ... application of mind is a contravention of statutory role of the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 251(2) of I.T. Act. Also, section 251(1)(a) provides that while disposing of an appeal against assessment order, Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. Similarly

Sudhir Yashwant Kadam, Ratnagiri vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ratnagiri

ITA 767/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.767/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sudhir Yashwant Kadam, V The Income Tax Officer, H.No.127, Bahutule Wadi, S Ward-1, Ratnagiri. Mavlange, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra – 415616. Pan: Abfpk2131A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi U/Sec.250 Of The Act Dated 16.02.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ito Of Rs.13,47,713/- Representing The Total Of Cash Deposits In The Bank Account, Ignoring Submission Of The Appellant That: A. The Source Of The Cash Deposit Being Out Of His Business Turnover No Addition Is Sudhir Yashwant Kadam [A]

Section 246ASection 250Section 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 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 3 Sudhir Yashwant Kadam [A] Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind

Sujata Suresh Nikam, Kalamboli Panvel vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -5 Panvel, Panvel

ITA 474/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.474/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujata Suresh Nikam, V The Income Tax Officer, Kl 4/10/3, Sector 4E, S Ward-5, Panvel. Kalamboli, Maharashtra – 410218. Pan: Abspn5521A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Kadrekar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.06.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) – Nfac Has Erred In Confirming Order Imposing Penalty U/S 271B Of The Act Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Panvel. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Failed To Consider The Sujata Suresh Nikam [A]

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 271B

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

Shaikh Ayub Shaikh Mahebub Qureshi, Parbhani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Parbhani

ITA 396/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shaikh Ayub Shaikh Mahebub V The Income Tax Officer, Qureshi, S Ward, Parbhani. Khureshi Traders, Khureshi Mohala, Purna, Parbhani, Maharashtra – 431511. Pan: Bkjpk1916R Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Mrs. M.N.Kulkarani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 04.01.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing Appellant’S Appeal Alleging ‘Unexplained Cash Deposit In The Bank Account' In Para 5.2. Appellant Prays For Allowing Assessee'S Appeal Cancelling Addition Made By Assessing Officer As Issue Before Cit[A] Is Income Assessed Estimating Profit. Shaik Ayub Shaikh Mahebub Qureshi [A]

Section 234Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

Shaik Ayub Shaikh Mahebub Qureshi [A] 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 or annul ... 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

Khengarsinh Jadavbhai Gohel, Petlad vs. ITO Petlad, Petlad

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

ITA 579/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad21 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253(3)Section 69A

merit. The power of ld. Addl./JIT(A) are co- terminus with the power of Assessing Officer which even includes power of enhancement(Section 251(1)(a) and 251(1A)(a)). The ld. Addl/JCIT(A) could have issued summons u/s. 131 to the assessee or could have called for information

Bharatkumar Bhikhabhai Chavda, Hariyala Kheda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Nadiad

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

ITA 797/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad In Ita No. 797/Ahd/2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18 Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/ 2023-24/1059995984(1) Dated 22-01-2024 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals),National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi , Which Appeal In Turn Has Arisen From The Assessment Order Dated 07-11-2019 Passed By The 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 253(3)Section 69A