← All Phrases

“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)

Vinod Sabhapati Pandey, Chandrapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Nagpur

ITA 111/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.111/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vinod Sabhapati Pandet, The Income Tax Officer, C/O. Chadda Transport, Ward V Ward-4, Chandrapur. No.05, Manikgarh Cement S Rd, Bakhardi, Gadhchandur, Chandrapur – 442908. Pan: Bgppp8723F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Agrawal – Adv.(Ar) Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2013-14 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Vinod Sabhapati Pandet [A]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 44A

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

Apeak Infotech Private Liminted, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur

ITA 103/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.103/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Apeak Infotech Private The Assistant Limited, V Commissioner Of Income Room No.3, Ground Floor, S Tax, Plot No.101, East High Court Circle-4, Nagpur. Road, New Ramdas Peth, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Aafca5453R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Hitesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Apeak Infotech Private Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

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

Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd, Lucknow vs. ACIT Reang-1, Lucknow

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

ITA 19/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. V. The Assistant 761, Village – Anaura Commissioner Of Near Indira Canal Income Tax Faizabad Road, Lucknow Range-I, Lucknow Pan:Aabap6918L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18 04 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 04 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR
Section 43C

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) Page 7 of 8 provides that while disposing of an appeal against assessment order, Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to confirm, reduce

Pingash Marketing Private Limited, Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 99/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Gopesh Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 98/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Vidhi Cinemas Pvt.Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 88/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Zhilmil Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 87/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Shanta Blankets Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 84/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Tushar Rampal Sahu, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Nagpur

ITA 124/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.124/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Tushar Rampal Sahu, The Income Tax Officer, 69, Near Pritam Complex, V Ward-4(3), Nagpur. Bhandara Road, Small S Factory Area, Bagadganj, Nagpur – 440008. Pan: Blvps8054B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani. Advocate(Ar) Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2014-15 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Tushar Rampal Sahu [A]

Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

Tushar Rampal Sahu [A] 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 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

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 39/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 38/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centreal Circel-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 37/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 36/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 35/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 34/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Kapil Hirani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr KC Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 40a

records. At the outset in this bunch of appeals we note that, in view of the restriction placed by clause (a) of section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to adjudicate the appeals ex-parte owning to non-prosecution by the assessee and without touching

Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., Nagpur vs. Director of Income Tax, Nagpur

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

ITA 56/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.56/Nag/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2018-19 Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., The Director Of Income C-108, Hingna Road, Midc V Tax, Industrial Area, Hingna, S Intelligence & Criminal Investigation, 3Rd Floor, Nagpur – 440028. Pan: Aaacb5340H Room No.301, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440001. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajesh Loya – Ca-Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Passed U/S250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Emanating From The Penalty Order Under Section 271Fa Of The Act Dated 27.09.2019 Passed By Director Of Income Tax(Intelligence & Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., [A]

Section 2Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 285Section 285B

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. Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistnat Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur

ITA 45/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.45/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Unijules Life Sciences The Assistant Ltd., V Commissioner Of Income B-35/36, Midc, S Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kamleshwar, Nagpur. Nagpur – 441501 Pan: Aaacu8032D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Adv.-Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 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(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 08.11.2011 For The A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From The Order Under Section 153A R.W.S 143(3) Of M/S.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A]

Section 14Section 153ASection 154Section 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

Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Pune vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5 Pune, Pune

ITA 1397/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1397/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Namdeo Indarrao Gore, The Dy.Commissioner Of Subhadra Cme Engineers, V Income Tax, Plot No.1, Subhadra House, S Circle-5, Pune. Nanded Phata, Maharashtra – 411041. Pan: Aavpg0671L Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya – Ca Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Ar Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2024 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 26.10.2023. The Assessee For A.Y.2015-16 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Ao Erred In Making & Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming An Addition Of Rs.30,71,906/- U/S 41(1) Of The Income Tax Act On Account Of Unpaid Sundry Creditors. Namdeo Indarrao Gore [A]

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

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

Govind Milk and Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., Phaltan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

ITA 848/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.848/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Govind Milk & Milk Products The Income Tax Pvt. Ltd., V Officer, Ward-3, Ganesh Sheri, Pune Pandharpur S Satara. Road, At Post Kolki, Phaltan, Satara, Maharashtra. Pan: Aaacg7588A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri R.Y.Balawade – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 13/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26/03/2024 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 25.05.2023. The Assessee For A.Y.2019-20 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Passing Her Order Ex-Parte Without Allowing Appellant Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.43,51,377/- Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Made By The Ld Ao Without Govind Milk & Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 40

Milk and Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., [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 ... 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

Kolaparthy Suvarna Lakshmi, Nellore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nellore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 595/HYD/2023[A.Y.2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Kolaparthy Suvarna Lakshmi, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Nellore. Central Circle – 1, Nellore. Pan : Agupk4977A. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. Ar. Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 69A

self assessment tax for the A.Y. 2018-19 and consequently interest was calculated at higher amount. In exercise of powers given under section 251(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer is directed to verify the said claim of the appellant and act as per the provisions