← 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)

Amit Sajjan Kumar Gupta, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1378/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalamitsajjankumargupta, Dcit-8(2)(1), 110, Ashirwad, Roomno.624, बनाम/ Ahmedabad Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Carnac Bunder, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400009. Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abrpg2852N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravikant Pathak.Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 08/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 10/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit (A) Nfac, Erred In Confirming Order Made U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Is Bad In Law, Ultra Vires & Without Appreciating The Facts, Submission & Evidences In The Proper Perspective, Without Providing Copies Of Material Used Against The Appellant & Without Providing Opportunity Of Cross Examination, Is Liable To Be Annulled.

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak.ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)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 no 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 additionsWhile allowing relief to the assessee

Kasree Devi, Mawana Meerut vs. ITO Ward-1(1)(3), Ayakar Bhawan, Bhainsali Ground, Meerut

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1019/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 250Section 250(4)Section 69A

appeal raised by the appellant is dismissed. For Ready reference Section 250(4) & 250(6) is reproduced as under: 250 (4): The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make such further inquiry as he thinks fit, or may direct the Assessing Officer ... make further inquiry and report the result of the same to the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the [Commissioner (Appeals). 250/6) The order of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals or the commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon

Asian Granito India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy./Jt.CIT., (OSD), Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 620/AHD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

open in heaps. Therefore, loss on account of cyclone and rain would be on an estimated basis, in fact that was what the Commissioner (Appeals) had found as a matter of fact that one estimate was substituted by another estimate. According to the Commissioner (Appeals) in the Circumstances, the assessee ... quantity. In the light of the said factual position, it was not possible to interfere with the final conclusion of the Tribunal Both the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal had found and come to the conclusion that the penalty was not leviable in the instant case, though for different reasons

Asian Granito India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy./Jt.CIT., (OSD), Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 619/AHD/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

open in heaps. Therefore, loss on account of cyclone and rain would be on an estimated basis, in fact that was what the Commissioner (Appeals) had found as a matter of fact that one estimate was substituted by another estimate. According to the Commissioner (Appeals) in the Circumstances, the assessee ... quantity. In the light of the said factual position, it was not possible to interfere with the final conclusion of the Tribunal Both the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal had found and come to the conclusion that the penalty was not leviable in the instant case, though for different reasons

Amitabh Das Mundhra, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 965/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 57

make some verification but noting ingenuine or wrong was noted by him. Rather, the transactions were duly substantiated. Similarly, at the stage of the Commissioner (Appeals) also nothing wrong or ingenuine could be brought on record by him. Under these circumstances, the disallowance has been made merely on the basis

Idfc First Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1171/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1170 & 1171/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. M/S. Idfc First Bank Ltd., The Pcit / Acit, [Earlier Known As Idfc Bank Ltd.], Corporate Cirlce-1(1), Krm Tower, 7Th Floor, No.1, Chennai. Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai. [Pan: Aadci 6523 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh –
Section 147Section 148Section 263

with the assessment in respect of the above said five assessment years. Insofar as the appeals filed against the order of assessment before the Commissioner (Appeals), we direct the appellate authority to dispose of the same, expeditiously. With the above observations, the civil appeals are dismissed. No costs. 4. According

Idfc First Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT-1, Chennai

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

ITA 1170/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1170 & 1171/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. M/S. Idfc First Bank Ltd., The Pcit / Acit, [Earlier Known As Idfc Bank Ltd.], Corporate Cirlce-1(1), Krm Tower, 7Th Floor, No.1, Chennai. Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai. [Pan: Aadci 6523 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh –
Section 147Section 148Section 263

with the assessment in respect of the above said five assessment years. Insofar as the appeals filed against the order of assessment before the Commissioner (Appeals), we direct the appellate authority to dispose of the same, expeditiously. With the above observations, the civil appeals are dismissed. No costs. 4. According

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 454/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

total sale is accepted by the Assessing Officer, he could not have questioned the very basis of the purchases. In essence, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) believed the assessee’s theory that the purchases were not bogus but were made from the parties other than those mentioned in the books

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 453/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.453/Jp/2024 On The Following Grounds; “(I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,33,606/- Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Has Shown Bogus Purchase Of Rs 1,73,34,424/- During The Year From A Bogus Concern. 3

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

total sale is accepted by the Assessing Officer, he could not have questioned the very basis of the purchases. In essence, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) believed the assessee's theory that the purchases were not bogus but were made from the parties other than those mentioned in the books ... total sale is accepted by the Assessing Officer, he could not have questioned the very basis of the purchases. In essence, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) believed the assessee's theory that the purchases were not bogus but were made from the parties other than those mentioned in the books

Sriyans Kumar Jain HUF, Berasia vs. PCIT (Central), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed

ITA 289/IND/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2019-20 Sriyans Kumar Jain Huf, Pcit (Central), Prop. Of M/S Siryans Bhopal Kumar Akshay Kumar Jain, बनाम/ Main Road, Vs. Berasia

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 270ASection 271ASection 68Section 69Section 69A

However, the provision of section 271AAC(1) reads as under: “Penalty in respect of certain income. 271AAC. (1) The Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) may, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act other than the provisions of section 271AAB, direct that, in a case where the income determined includes

Malwa Realities Private Limited, Indore vs. ACIT-1(1), Indore, Aaykar Bhawan

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 461/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Indore07 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Malwa Realities Private Acit-I(1), Limited, Indore. 509-510, Princess Business Skypark, Pu-3, बनाम/ Scheme No. 54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aadcm9999C Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.10.2024

Section 143(3)

representative, as the case may be, may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the Commissioner (Appeals), through the National Faceless Appeal Centre, under this Scheme. (3) The concerned Commissioner (Appeals) shall allow the request for personal hearing and communicate

Jyoti Prakash Deshmukh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2), Kalyan

In the result ground no. 5

ITA 3295/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal, Accountantjyoti Prakash Deshmukh F003, Shiv Shanti Complex, Manjarli, Badlapur West, Maharashtra – 421 301, Pan No.: Agspd2705K. ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward 2(2), Kalyan Mohini Plaza Building, Wayle Nagar, Khadkpada, Kalyan, Maharashtra – 421 301 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Rokhriyal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 251

discuss the provisions of section 251 of the Act as under: Section - 251, Income-tax Act, 1961 - FA, 2023 Powers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] [Commissioner (Appeals)]. 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the [Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers— (a) in an appeal against ... other case, he may pass such orders in the appeal as he thinks fit. (1A) in disposing of an appeal, the Joint 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

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jaipur vs. Gordhandas Nandkishore Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed with no orders as to

ITA 556/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Nargas, Addl. CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

assessee in his bank account during the demonetization period was undisclosed income under the garb of cash sales. In first appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that a portion of the deposits was not of specified bank notes, that section 68 of the Act was not applicable in respect of sales ... already a part of the income returned and that the books of account had not been rejected as no discrepancy was found therein. The Commissioner (Appeals) thus deleted the addition. On further appeal it was held “that regular books of account, bills, vouchers and stock registers having complete quantitative details

Shree Krishna Gaushala, Ramgarh Shekhawati Sikar vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-II Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes with no orders as to cost

ITA 399/JPR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 399/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shree Krishna Gaushala Ramgarh Shekhawati Sikar cuke Vs. The ITO (Exemption) Ward -II Sikar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATS 5144H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Saurv Harsh, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 25/09/2024 mn?kks"k.kk

For Appellant: Shri Saurv Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)

during current year and never in earlier years any objection on that aspect was taken Whether, in view of aforesaid, order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) was to be upheld - Held, yes [Paras 4 to 16] [In favour of assessee) 1.10.It is also a settled principle of law that Section

Rajkumar Asnani, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Jaipur

ITA 690/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)(V.C.)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Shankar Traders & Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 199/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shankar Traders & Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aaykar Bhawan, A-Block, 1St Floor, Mercantile P-7, Chowringhee Square, Building, 9, Lal Bazar Street, Kolkata-700, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, [Pan: Aadcs8907L] West Bengal अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Susanta Saha, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 68

relevant Act is markedly different. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was utterly perverse and had been rightly set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal had rightly deleted the additions under section 68.” 17. Respectfully following the above decisions, which in our view are squarely applicable

Suwalka and Suwalka Properties and Builders Pvt Ltd, Kota, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Central Cirlce, Kota, Rajasthan

ITA 302/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

upon by the appellant held that the Assessing Officer made certain disallowances of expenses while completing the assessment under section 143(3) whereas the Commissioner (Appeals) invoked the powers to enhance the assessment by rejecting the books of account and consequently the income of the assessee was enhanced by applying ... taken up by the Assessing Officer during the scrutiny assessment are very much subject matter of appeal so far as the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) exercising enhancement of income. In this case also the amount of Rs. 2,64,00,000/- was subject matter of assessment which were taken

T and T Infra Limited, Pune vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-7, Pune

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

ITA 291/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 T & T Infra Limited Acit, Circle – 7, Pune A-1, Vishnu Vihar, Bibwewadi Vs. Kondhwa Road, Market Yard, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aaect3902H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Ghia Department By : S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-10-2024 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri Tarun GhiaFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari and Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(2)Section 80I

Khurana Engineering Ltd. (2024) 162 taxmann.com 7 (Ahmedabad – Trib.), he drew the attention of the Bench to the following head note: “Where Commissioner (Appeals) had made general and bald observations while granting deduction claimed by assessee under section 80IA without analyzing details of all specific work executed by assessee ... claimed that it acted as developer and claimed to be eligible for deduction under section 80IA, matter was to be restored back to Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication.” 21. Referring to various decisions which were relied on by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A), he submitted that

Mahalingam Sumathi, Salem vs. ITO, Ward 1(8), Salem

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1363/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.: 1363/Chny/2024 िनधा" रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Mahalingam Sumathi, Income Tax Officer, 7/155A, Indhira Nagar, V. Ward -1(8), Mettur, Salem-636 401. Salem. [Pan:Ctzps-8862-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. T.M.Suganthamala, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.10.2024

For Respondent: Smt. T.M.Suganthamala, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 271Section 69Section 69A

assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1.The impugned Order is illegal, unsustainable and liable to be quashed. 2.The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not properly and holistically considered the submissions filed by the Appellant. 3.Without prejudice, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering the key submission ... 1363/Chny/2024 maintenance of books of accounts, the invocation of Section 69 A is out of place. 4.Without prejudice, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering that the Appellant is not the owner of the sums deposited in the Bank Account, when he or she specifically acknowledged the fact

Sundaramurthy Sathyakumar, Chennai vs. ITO Corp Ward 6(3), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1011/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1011/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sundaramurthy Sathyakumar, Income Tax Officer, V-31, 13Th Street, Anna Nagar, V. Corporate Ward -6(3), Chennai - 600 040. Chennai. [Pan: Aasps-1930-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. K. Meenakshi Sundaram, Itp अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.10.2024

For Respondent: Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 68

Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16, vide order dated 14.02.2024. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1.The Commissioner(Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in reproducing the same facts stated by the Assessing Officer for long pages in his order and finally confirming ... order :-2-: ITA. No: 1011/Chny/2024 of the Assessing Officer without telling his own decision on the issues in an unequivocal manner. 2.The Commissioner(Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre had not acted as a fact finding authority independently and erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer more