“Section 253(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 253Section 253(4)33 judgments

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 DELHI, DELHI vs. SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORPORATION LTD, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4679/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

unambiguous. The right granted to the respondent by\nthe said Rule cannot be taken away by the Tribunal by referring to\nprovisions of Section 253(4) of the Act. The Tribunal was,\ntherefore, in error in holding that the finding recorded by the\nCommissioner (Appeals) remained unchallenged since the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. FARIDABAD PRESSWELL PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the

ITA 2801/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2801/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Assistant Commissioner Of Faridabad Presswell Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Vs. 24, Ashoka Chamber, 5B, Central Circle-25, Room No.317, Rajindra Park, Pusa Road, 3Rd Floor, E-2, Ara Centre, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaacfs815B Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250

unambiguous. The right granted to the respondent by the said Rule cannot be taken away by the Tribunal by referring to provisions of Section 253(4) of the Act. The Tribunal was, therefore, in error in holding that the finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) remained unchallenged since the assessee

CLEMENTINE FERNANDES ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5569/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 250Section 253(4)Section 68

addition of Rs. 19,17,000/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. 1.2 That under section 253(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal was required to be filed within 60 days from the date ... That the appellant is seeking condonation of the said delay of 6 days under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with section 253(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds stated hereinafter. 2. GROUNDS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY 2.1 LACK OF ADEQUATE KNOWLEDGE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 could not have been taken away by the Tribunal by referring to the provisions of Section 253(4) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court had further observed that though the issue regarding the validity of the jurisdiction assumed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR vs. RAMAVTAR VIJAYVARGIYA, JAIPUR

8. As a result, the appeal filed by the department is hereby dismissed being not maintainable

ITA 953/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal, While Challenging Order Dated 05.04.2025, Passed By Learned Cit(A), Relating To The Assessment Year 2012-13, Whereby The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Allowed & The Assessment Order Dated 03.12.2019 Has Been Set-Aside. 2. On The Other Hand, The Assessee Has Filed Cross-Objections To The Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Opposing The Same.

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargava, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. JCIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153CSection 253(4)

filed by the department is hereby dismissed being not maintainable. Cross-Objections 9. Said cross- objections have been presented by the assessee under section 253(4) of the Act, on having learnt about filing of appeal by the department against the order passed by Learned CIT(A). As noticed above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12, PUNE vs. VARUN JAIN, PUNE

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

ITA 2720/PUN/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamorecross Objection No.14/Pun/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2720/Pun/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Varun Jain, The Acit, P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, V Circle-12, Pune. Pune – 411014. S. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Acit, Varun Jain, Circle-12, Pune. Vs. P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Fenil Bhatt – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar - Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under C.O.No.14/Pun/2025 [A] & Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 [R]

Section 10(35)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 250Section 253(4)

Assessment Order under section 147 r.w.s. 144B dated 19.03.2024. The Assessee has also filed the Cross Objection Appeal in C.O.No.14/PUN/2025 under section 253(4) of the Act. 1.1 Revenue has raised the following Grounds of appeal “a. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the CITIA) was justified

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1253/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Vijay, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

ITA 272/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 68(1)

issuing necessary direction to\nthe Assessing Officer. Sub-section (3) prescribes the period of limitation, within\nwhich an appeal could be preferred. Section 253(4) of the Act lays down that\neither the Assessing Officer or the assessee, on receipt of notice that an appeal\nagainst the order

ACIT CC-3, THANE, THANE vs. PREMIER MARINE PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly

ITA 4451/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner Of Premier Marine Products Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax-3, 3Rd Floor, D Wing Thane Vs Amerchand Mansion, 16 Madam Cama Road, Colaba, Mumbai 400039 (Pan : Aahcp1350N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nitesh Joshi Advocate & Shri Pratik Mehta, Ca Revenue : Shri R. A. Dhyani, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi Advocate, and Shri Pratik Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. A. Dhyani, CIT DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 194CSection 40A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX, RAIPUR vs. BALAJEE LOHA PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

ITA 356/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 356/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

could not have been taken away by the 45 DCIT vs Balajee Loha Pvt. Ltd., Raipur Tribunal by referring to the provisions of Section 253(4) of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court had observed that though the issue as regards the validity of the jurisdiction assumed

DCIT, CIRCLE vs. VIVEK LODHA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department and C

ITA 506/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148oSection 153CSection 253(4)Section 68Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. SUBHASH TYAGI PROP. M/S KRISHANA CONSTRUCTION, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 1342/Del/21 is allowed

ITA 1342/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2016-17

For Respondent: Sh.Sanjay Pandey, CIT DR &

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 253(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

question. The assessee, in turn, has also filed Cross Objection [CO 59/D/2021] in the Revenue’s Appeal under Section 253(4) of the Act. 2. All the captioned Appeals and Cross Objection being inter- connected, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. ITA No.1044/Del/2021 (Assessee

SHRI SUBHASH TYAGI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 1342/Del/21 is allowed

ITA 1044/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2016-17

For Respondent: Sh.Sanjay Pandey, CIT DR &

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 253(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ROMELL HOUSING LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, the Cross Objection by the assessee is allowed, while the\nRevenue's Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3935/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 253(4)Section 56(2)(x)

nWhile in its Cross Objection, the assessee has raised the following\ngrounds:\n\"The Applicant files the present cross objections under section 253(4) of the\nIncome-tax Act (the Act), in respect of the appellate order dated 31.08.2023\npassed by the CIT(A), on the following amongst other grounds ... Supreme Court judgments regarding the operation of registered documents.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 56(2)(x)", "Section 250", "Section 143(3)", "Section 144B", "Section 253(4)", "Section 47", "Section 50C", "Section 155", "Section 54", "Section 56(2)(vii)(b)" ], "issues": "Whether Section 56(2)(x) of the Income

DCIT, C-1(1) , CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FIDELITY INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1328/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate and Ms. Sumisha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 37(1)

delay in filing the Cross Objection by 533 days. 20. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that as per the provisions of section 253(4) of the Act, the cross objections before the Tribunal are required to be filed within 30 days from the receipt of notice of appeal ... assessee is maintainable at the very threshold and meets the requirement of law. 32. In this regard, we refer to the provisions of section 253(4) which reads as under: Section 253 (4): The assessing Officer or the assessee, as the case may be, on receipt of notice that

JCIT (IT) (OSD)-4(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ARUN RANGACHARI, MUMBAI

ITA 2393/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Section 132(4)Section 147Section 254(2)Section 9(1)(i)

Cross objections are beyond the prescribed time limit and\nwithout any reasonable cause for delay and also drew\nreference to the provision of section 253(4) of the Act.\n• Objected the arguments put forth by the Ld.AR that the\nassessment should have been made u/s 153C

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SWARGATE, PUNE vs. BARCLAYS GLOBAL SERVICE CENTRE PVT LTD, PUNE

ITA 1222/PUN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Mr Sourabh Kulkarni [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

CHIRIPAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 708/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 708/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Chirpal Industries Limited, D.C.I.T, Chirpal House, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2), Shivranjani Cross Road, Ahmedabad. Satellight, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaacc8513B

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr.DR

Section 116JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, अहमदाबादनयायपीी IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4) , MUMBAI vs. RONAK GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 1496/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit Central Circle- 2(4) M/S Ronak Gems Pvt Ltd Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, 311, Mehta Bhavan, Shop No. Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M.K. 5, Opp. Charni Road, Road Churchgate, Mumbai- 400 004 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aabcr 7550 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ms. Madhuri Tambe & Aishwarya Wanikar Revenue By : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ms. MadhuriFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 153A

away by the Tribunal by referring to the provisions of cannot be taken away by the Tribunal by referring to the provisions of Section 253(4) of the IT Act. The ITAT was, therefore, in error in Section 253(4) of the IT Act. The ITAT was, therefore, in error ... Section 253(4) of the IT Act. The ITAT was, therefore, in error in holding that the finding recorded by the CIT (Appeals) remaine holding that the finding recorded by the CIT (Appeals) remaine holding that the finding recorded by the CIT (Appeals) remained unchallenged since the assessee

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 2, RAIGARH(CG) vs. SHRI SHRI BISHAMBHAR DAYAL AGRAWAL, JASHPUR (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 223/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 41(4)Section 69

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 could not have been taken away by the Tribunal by referring to the provisions of Section 253(4) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court had observed that though the issue as regards the validity of the jurisdiction assumed

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2