← All Phrases

“Section 253(6)”

Section References (mined)Section 253Section 253(6)18 judgments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-30, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. V. K. READY MIX CONCRETE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

ITA 2954/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-30, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. V. K. READY MIX CONCRETE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

ITA 2953/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-30, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. V. K. READY MIX CONCRETE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

ITA 2952/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

VK READY MIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, DELHI

ITA 1443/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

VK READY MIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN.

ITA 1442/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

VK READY MIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN. DELHI

ITA 1441/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

VK READY MIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -30,, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN.

ITA 1440/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 253(6)

observed and issued directions for defect removal and posted the matter for 17/12/2025. Once again there has been no response from assessee. 3. Section 253(6) of the Act clearly postulate that an appeal before the tribunal shall be filed in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner

THOTTIAPATTI MUTHUSAMY MOHAN,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1,, NAMAKKAL

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

ITA 1327/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1327/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Thottiapatti Muthusamy Mohan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 629, Salem Road, Circle 1, Namakkal 637 001. Namakkal. [Pan:Aldpm2174M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-13, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer By Passing Exparte Order In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 253(6)

ground of non- compliance to the hearing notices and not on merits and therefore, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was only ₹.500/-. He placed reliance on the decision of Co- ordinate Bench in the case ... only on the ground of non- appearance and not on merits. Therefore, as per the assessee, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was only 500/-. In support, learned counsel has filed a decision of Hon'ble Karnataka

SATISH NARAYAN TARALE,BELGAVI vs. INTL.TAXATION WARD, PANAJI

ITA 55/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 055/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Satish Narayan Tarale 35, Laxmi Narayan Niwas, 2Nd Stage, Hanuman Nagar, Belgaum-590001. Pan : Afkpt0032Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenges Din & Order No Itba/Ast/F/144/2024- 25/1072202908(1) Dt. 15/01/2025 Passed By The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] U/S 144 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Anent To Assessment Year 2019-20 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 253(6)Section 3Section 4Section 6(6)Section 69A

liability being bad in law and (ii) for refund of excess appeal fees paid u/c (c) as against fees payable u/c (b) of section 253(6) of the Act. ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 15 Satish Narayan Tarale Vs ITO ITA Nos.055/PAN/2025 AY: 2019-20 We have heard rival party

DK 140 UTHANGARAI PUESHES TEACHERS & EMP. CO-OP THRIFT & CREDIT SCOIETY LTD.,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KRISHNAGIRI

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

ITA 1227/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1227/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Dk140 Uthangarai Pueshes Teachers Vs. The Income Tax Officer & Emp. Co-Op. Thrift & Credit Ward 1, Society Limited, 140, Uthangarai, Krishnagiri. Krishnagiri-635 001. [Pan:Aagad3195A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 253(6)Section 44ASection 80P

ground of non-compliance to the hearing notices and not on merits and therefore, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was only ₹.500/-. He placed reliance on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in the case ... only on the ground of non- appearance and not on merits. Therefore, as per the assessee, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was only 500/-. In support, learned counsel has filed a decision of Hon'ble Karnataka

S.S.S. EXPORT,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), ERODE

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

ITA 1225/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1225/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 S.S.S. Export, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D.No. 36/2, Mariyamman Koil Street, Ward 1(1), Valliamma Pudur, Nambiyur, Erode. Gobichettipalayam, Erode 638 458. [Pan:Abwfs8232K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Treating Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period As 2

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 148Section 253(6)Section 69A

ground of non- compliance to the hearing notices and not on merits and therefore, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was only ₹.500/-. He placed reliance on the decision of Co- ordinate Bench in the case ... only on the ground of non- appearance and not on merits. Therefore, as per the assessee, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was only 500/-. In support, learned counsel has filed a decision of Hon'ble Karnataka

SUBRAMANIYAM KULANDHAIVEL,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-1,, NAMAKKAL

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

ITA 976/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 976/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 Shri Subramaniyam The Income Tax Officer, Kulandhaivel, Vs. Ward 1, No.7/51, Vadugapalayam, Namakkal. Mavureddipatti Post, Tiruchengode, Namakkal – 637 212. Pan: Aznpk 3744M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Kumar Chandan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Chandan, JCIT
Section 250Section 253(6)

ground of delay in filing appeal and not on merits. Therefore, as per Ld. AR, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of the Act was only Rs.500/-. He placed reliance on the decision of Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Aasife Biriyani ... only on the ground of non-appearance and not on merits. Therefore, as per the assessee, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was only 500/-. In support, learned counsel has filed a decision of Hon'ble Karnataka

BHARGAVKUMAR PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2083/AHD/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 253(6)

prescribed as per law. 4. With regards to the filing fees being paid short, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that section 253(6) of the Act, which prescribed the appeal filing fees in case of appeals filed to the ITAT, the quantum of fees was fixed ... while sub clause (d) dealt with other ITA No.2082 and 2083/Ahd/2024 3 remaining cases. Our attention was drawn to the relevant provisions of section 253(6) of the Act as under: “6) An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified

ARUN GOPILAL SAMNANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2082/AHD/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 253(6)

prescribed as per law. 4. With regards to the filing fees being paid short, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that section 253(6) of the Act, which prescribed the appeal filing fees in case of appeals filed to the ITAT, the quantum of fees was fixed ... while sub clause (d) dealt with other ITA No.2082 and 2083/Ahd/2024 3 remaining cases. Our attention was drawn to the relevant provisions of section 253(6) of the Act as under: “6) An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified

SH. ASHOK KUMAR S/O /SH KUNWAR PAL SARASWAAT ,MATHURA vs. ITO 1 (3)(1), MATHURA

The appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 195/AGR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 253(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL

AASIFE BIRIYANI PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2460/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2460/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Aasife Biriyani Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Glrs, No.325, Door No.11/3Q, Corporate Circle 1(1) Railway Station Road, Chennai. Azharkhana, Alandur, Chennai 600 016. [Pan: Aamca 9955H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram & Ms. Sonali Kothari.S. Advocates ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.T.M. Suganthamala, Irs, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram and MsFor Respondent: Ms.T.M. Suganthamala, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 253(6)

ground of delay in filing appeal and not on merits. Therefore, as per the ld. AR the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of the Act was only Rs.500/-. He placed reliance on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Anil Kumar Ohja ... only on the ground of non-appearance and not on merits. Therefore, as per the assessee, the fees as per clause (d) of Section 253(6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was only 500/-. In support, learned counsel has filed a decision of Hon'ble Karnataka

M/S ROTHE ERDE INDIA PVT LTD,NASHIK vs. PCIT, NASHIK, NASHIK

The appeal stands DISMISSED in above terms

ITA 1050/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Pune23 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1050/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S Rothe Erde India Pvt. Ltd. 429, At Post: Gonde, Village: Wadiwarhe, Igatpuri, Nashik-422403. Pan: Aadcr3029G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S

For Appellant: Ms Chandani Shah [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satyajit Mandal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 253(6)Section 263

cannot proceed to adjudicate the issue on merits as this appeal deserves dismissal in-limine as it lost its sanctity in view of section 253(6) of the Act r.w.r rule 12 ‘ITAT-Rules’ which empowers the Tribunal to reject the memorandum of appeal if it is not in prescribed ... granted to it through defect notice dt. 21/05/2024 and direction of the bench on first scheduled hearing. Such defective appeal in view of section 253(6) of the Act r.w.r. 12 of ITAT- Rules, and former judicial precedents (supra) deserves to be dismissed in-limine, with a leave granted

NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 487/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Ltd. V. Tax Nirma House Circle-3(1)(1) Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Near Income Tax Circle Gujarat Ahmedabad-380 009 Gujarat Pan: Aaacn 5353 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri Hemanshu Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2024 & 23.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Coram: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Directed Against The Appellate Order Dated 19/05/2022 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Cit(A)” In Short] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2013-14 (Din & Order No.Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1043081956(1)), The Appellate Proceedings Have Arisen Before Ld.Cit(A) From Rectification Order Dated 16/02/2022 Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer(Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 154 Of The 1961 Act (Din & Order Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. V. Dcit Ay 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 250Section 253(6)(c)Section 253(6)(d)

observed that the assesse deposited appeal fee of Rs. 500/- only while filing appeal with ITAT, while the appeal fee payable as per Section 253(6)(c) payable by assesse is Rs. 10,000/- , and hence the appeal fee paid was deficient by Rs. 9,500/- . The appeal ... said rectification order by filing rectification application u/s 154 to rectify rectification order u/s 154 , the appeal fee payable is covered by Section 253(6)(c) and not Section 253(6)(d). Thus, the appeal fee paid was deficient by Rs. 9500/- which the assesse is required to deposit, were