← All Phrases

“Commissioner (Appeals)”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(16A) / Section 1174,761 judgments

The decision most relied on for Commissioner (Appeals) is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688), cited in 1,372 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Commissioner (Appeals)

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.

Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT
199 ITR 351 · 1993 · High Court
441
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider additional grounds for deduction, even if not originally claimed before the Assessing Officer or Appellate Assistant Commissioner, provided the facts are not disputed and it pertains to a legal claim for correct tax liability. This is because the purpose of an appeal is to ascertain the correct tax liability.

CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate
53 ITR 225 · 1964 · Supreme Court
359
citing judgments

The Commissioner (Appeals) holds plenary powers when disposing of an appeal, with their scope being coterminous with the Assessing Officer. This allows the CIT(A) to exercise all powers of the AO, including admitting additional evidence and redetermining income.

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.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar
1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported
225
citing judgments

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT
30 SOT 374 · 2009 · ITAT
201
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) cannot expand the scope of an assessment or improve the Assessing Officer's case in a manner that usurps the revisional power of the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd.
56 Taxmann.com 286 · 2015 · High Court
196
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has an independent statutory obligation to conduct proper inquiries and verify facts, especially when the Assessing Officer has failed to do so. The CIT(A) must ensure effective inquiry is carried out before deleting additions or accepting additional evidence.

Judgments citing Commissioner (Appeals)

The Punukkannoor Service Cooperative Bank Limited No2722, Perumpuzha vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 2, Kollam

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 751/COCH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sabu, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 63Section 64Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

operative bank. In the light of the Larger Bench judgment of the Hon ble Kerala High Court, the original orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) suffer from mistake apparent on record and the same have been rightly recalled by him by invoking the provisions of section 154 of the Income

The Punukkannoor Service Cooperative Bank Limited No2722, Perumpuzha vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 2, Kollam

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 750/COCH/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sabu, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 63Section 64Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

operative bank. In the light of the Larger Bench judgment of the Hon ble Kerala High Court, the original orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) suffer from mistake apparent on record and the same have been rightly recalled by him by invoking the provisions of section 154 of the Income

Ahmed P. Surani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 3(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 361/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

Court dismissed the Department's appeal saying that no question of law arose from the order of the Tribunal affirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing relief to the assessee, and the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the effect that there was по adverse comment from the stock ... Appellate Tribunal. After detailed discussion, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has recorded the following findings of fact The above findings recorded by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) are quite exhaustive whereby he has discussed the basis on which the Assessing Officer had made the additions While allowing relief to the assessee

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT(OSD) Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1621/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

Delhi Tribunal considered above mentioned decisions of Co-ordinate Benches of Vishakapatnam and Ahmedabad and held as follows: “Analysis of order of Commissioner (Appeals) In view of the aforesaid provisions of sections 198 and 199, there is no justification not to grant credit of TDS to the assessee from whose ... been deducted by the deductor, more particularly B when such TDS stands duly declared as income by the assessee. The conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) to grant proportionate credit is also not in accordance with the cash system of accounting followed by the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) in her order

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1517/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

Delhi Tribunal considered above mentioned decisions of Co-ordinate Benches of Vishakapatnam and Ahmedabad and held as follows: “Analysis of order of Commissioner (Appeals) In view of the aforesaid provisions of sections 198 and 199, there is no justification not to grant credit of TDS to the assessee from whose ... been deducted by the deductor, more particularly B when such TDS stands duly declared as income by the assessee. The conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) to grant proportionate credit is also not in accordance with the cash system of accounting followed by the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) in her order

Shyam Sunder Mittal, Late Shri Shyam Sunder Mittal, Bharatpur vs. ITO, Bharatpur

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

ITA 1145/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Board CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 147Section 250Section 250(1)Section 250(4)Section 69C

appeal. ‘’1. That on the facts and in law impugned order u's 250 of the 1.T. Act dated 09/07/2024 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the name of Shyam Sunder Mittal (who died on 02/08/2019) instead of his legal heir, namely, Smt. Shashi Mittal, wife, Shri Akash Mittal ... BHARATPUR and Shri. Anubhav Mittal son dismissing assessee's appeal is most arbitrary, unjust and untenable in law 2. That the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Assessing Officer grossly erred in passing the impugned order u/s 250 dated 09/07/2024 dismissing assessee's appeal and the relevant assessment order

Vadodara Enviro Channel Ltd., (Formerly Known As Effluent Channel Project Ltd.), Vadodara vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2094/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

follows: “275(1A) In a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject- matter of an appeal 33[to the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253 or an appeal ... enhancing or reducing or cancelling penalty or dropping the proceedings for the imposition of penalty is passed before the order of 33[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the I.T.A Nos. 2387/Ahd/15 & 2094/Ahd/17 A.Y. 2011-12 Page

Vadodara Enviro Channel Ltd. (Formerly Known As Effluent Channel Project Ltd.), Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2387/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

follows: “275(1A) In a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject- matter of an appeal 33[to the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253 or an appeal ... enhancing or reducing or cancelling penalty or dropping the proceedings for the imposition of penalty is passed before the order of 33[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the I.T.A Nos. 2387/Ahd/15 & 2094/Ahd/17 A.Y. 2011-12 Page

ITO Ward 1, Sangli vs. Balu Musa Dange, Sangli

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

ITA 930/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.930/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, V Balu Musa Dange, Ward-I, Sangli. S I Dsp Office Vishrambag, Sangli. Maharashtra – 416415. Pan: Ancpd1861F Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Dated 07.03.2024 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “(I) Whether The Ld.Cit(A) Is Justified In Holding That If The Similar Addition Is Made In The Case Of Assessee’S Wife, The Addition In Case Of Assessee Shall Become Protective. (Ii) Whether The Ld.Cit(A) Is Justified In Deciding The Issue On The Basis Of Statement Of Fact, As The Assessee Did Neither Attend Before The Ao Nor Before The Cit(A).

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)

verification to the Assessing Officer. The relevant Section 251 of the Act is reproduced as under : 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, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment ... further enquiry or direct the Assessing Officer to make any enquiry and call for a report from the Assessing Officer. 250. (1) The [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner (Appeals) shall fix a day and place for the hearing of the appeal, and shall give notice of the same

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(2, Nagpur vs. M/S. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

chain of lending and borrowing was bogus.' Accordingly, amount of unsecured loan was treated as unexplained income of the assessee under section 68. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the assessee's appeal and held that as long as TIL had confirmed the loan advanced by it to the assessee, the assessee ... discharged the onus on it under section 68 to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the creditor. The Commissioner (Appeals) also noted that from the chart in regard to encashment of cheques issued in favour of the assessee it was clear that the corresponding amounts had been received from

Vimal Todi, Indore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 190/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

this Chapter shall be passed-- (a) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subjectmatter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, after the expiry of the financial year ... imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Appellate Tribunal is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, whichever

Vimal Todi, Indore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore

Appeals are allowed

ITA 189/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

this Chapter shall be passed-- (a) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subjectmatter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, after the expiry of the financial year ... imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Appellate Tribunal is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, whichever

D.C.I.T., Circle 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5792/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]
Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

first appellate authority. 68. As far as the assessee's eligibility for exemption under section 10(23G) of the Act is concerned, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) following CBDT circular no.762 dated 18th February 1998, held that the assessee is eligible to claim exemption under section ... providing long term finance to an enterprise wholly engaged in the business of infrastructure development shall be treated as infrastructure capital company. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed, the companies in which the assessee has made investment the income from which is claimed exempt under section 10(23G), are wholly

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5396/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]
Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

first appellate authority. 68. As far as the assessee's eligibility for exemption under section 10(23G) of the Act is concerned, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) following CBDT circular no.762 dated 18th February 1998, held that the assessee is eligible to claim exemption under section ... providing long term finance to an enterprise wholly engaged in the business of infrastructure development shall be treated as infrastructure capital company. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed, the companies in which the assessee has made investment the income from which is claimed exempt under section 10(23G), are wholly

Future Money Sales and Marketing Pvt.Ltd, A-28, Near Bankey Bihari Tampel Rajendra Nager, Bareilly-243001, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer -1(2), Bareilly-New.

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

ITA 194/LKW/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriafuture Money Sales & Income Tax Officer-1(2) V. Marketing Pvt. Ltd Rampur Garden, Bareilly- A-28, Near Bankey Bihari New-243001. Tample, Rajendra Nagar, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aabcf4395H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(2)(b)Section 249(3)

shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 1998, irrespective of the date of initiation of the assessment proceedings relating thereto be accompanied ... cause” for not filing the appeal within the due date. The relevant portion of the statute is reproduced below for ready reference: “(3) The Commissioner (Appeals) may admit an appeal after the expiration of the said period, if he is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. South City Projects (Kolkata) Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 36(1)(iii)

plot owned by the subsidiary company. The objection taken by the Assessing Officer was devoid of any legally sustainable merits, but then the Commissioner (Appeals) did not even deal with this issue at all. When there are no findings by the Commissioner (Appeals) on this aspect, the point of difference

Indian Redcross Society Anand District Branch, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 697/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A

completed well before due date fixed for filingForm10B and assessee had provided a reasonable cause of lapse on part of auditors in filingForm10B, Commissioner (Appeals) was supposed to take into consideration that non-filing of audit report along with return of income was a procedural omission, and accordingly, he should

Dharmendra Shantilal Patel, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 660/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

reasonable opportunity of hearing to assessee. In the case of Praveen Garg v. ITO 132 taxmann.com 142 (Delhi - Trib.), the Tribunal held that where Commissioner (Appeals) had given sufficient notice to assessee before enhancing assessment and had also given several adjournments to assessee for hearing of appeals, but, assessee ... avail opportunity of being heard, contention of assessee that no reasonable opportunity of being heard had been given by Commissioner (Appeals) being without merits was to be set aside. 6. In the instant facts, there has been deliberate non-compliance on part of the assessee at all stages of proceedings

Dharmendra Shantilal Patel, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1) Now Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

reasonable opportunity of hearing to assessee. In the case of Praveen Garg v. ITO 132 taxmann.com 142 (Delhi - Trib.), the Tribunal held that where Commissioner (Appeals) had given sufficient notice to assessee before enhancing assessment and had also given several adjournments to assessee for hearing of appeals, but, assessee ... avail opportunity of being heard, contention of assessee that no reasonable opportunity of being heard had been given by Commissioner (Appeals) being without merits was to be set aside. 6. In the instant facts, there has been deliberate non-compliance on part of the assessee at all stages of proceedings

Shri Nagin A Vaghela, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

ITA 270/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. Nos.449/Ahd/2019 & 44/Ahd/2020 (A.Ys.: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Nagin A. Vaghela, Tax, 11, Purva Bunglow, Nr. Central Circle-3, Manglam Duple, Sama, Vadodara Vadodara [Pan No.Aakpw5302R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 158B

assessment under section 143 on 31.12.1991 by making certain additions. The assessee filed appeal before Commissioner on 30.11.1992, objecting to the various additions. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the assessee had not paid the tax due on returned income at the time of filing the appeal and that under section ... assessee contended that assessee’s lapse in not paying the tax on the returned income was bona fide and it should be condoned. The Commissioner (Appeals), rejecting the assessee’s contention, declined to entertain the appeal, holding that with effect from 01.04.1989, the Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to condone