“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)

Income Tax Office Ward -1 Sonepat, Sonepat, Haryana vs. Om Minirals, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 209/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. J. P. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(10)(c)Section 270A(2)(a)Section 270A(3)(ii)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

considered before imposing the penalty. 13. Provisions of section 270A of the Act reads as under: “270A.(1) The Assessing Officer or [the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may, during the course of any proceedings under this Act, 8 CO No. 16/Del/2024

Nse Clearing Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3719/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2020-21 Nse Clearing Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Exchange Plaza, Bandra Income Tax-Circle 7(1)(1), Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai Vs.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43B

made by the Finance Act 2001 which was explained in Circular No. 14-Income Tax Dated 9- 11-2001 as under :- Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) not to include powers to set aside the assessment 78.1 Under the existing provision contained in sub-section (1) of section ... Income-tax Act, in an appeal filed before a Commissioner (Appeals) against an order of assessment, the Commissioner (Appeals) may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment, or he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance

Arbor Charitable Foundation, Khammam vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 262/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

evidence to substantiate the grounds raised. 6. Requirement of law under section 250 (6) of the Act is that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Even

Arbor Charitable Foundation, Khammam vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 261/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

Arbor Charitable Foundation, Khammam vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 252/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR

Section 250Section 250(6)

Harshal Suresh Karvir, Palghar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 4477/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Harshal Suresh Karvir National Faceless Assessment Centre 2Nd Floor, E Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru 397, Sutar Ali, Chinchani, Vs. Palghar, Palghar-401 503 Stadium, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chogule

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69

grounds: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [the learned Commissioner (Appeals)] erred in confirming the penalty of Rs.3,13,774/- on the observation that the Appellant had fumished inaccurate particulars of his income. Since ... penalty was levied by the Respondent on the limb of "concealment of income" which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not find to be applicable, the penalty ought to have been dropped instead of confirming on the other limb (i.e. concealment of particulars of income) on it was not never levied

Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3173/DEL/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Ms.Madhumita Roynova Promoters & Vs. Ito, Ward 13(3) Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Ito Building, I.P. Estate 7, Kapil Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi – 34

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anshul

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

under section 271(1)(c) is clearly leviable on the assessee for concealment of income. It is a settled legal position that powers of Commissioner (Appeals) in course of his appellate jurisdiction are co-terminus with powers of Assessing Officer, and the Commissioner (Appeals) can do what the Assessing Officer ... justified in levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) with reference to the addition made under section 68. Thus, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on this aspect was to be set aside [Para 27]" 416 In CIT v. Prathi Hardware Stores

M/S Five Roses, Kanpur vs. Dy, CIT-CC-1, Kanpur

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 273/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 153CSection 292C

appellant, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.” 5. The relevant provisions under I.T. Act regarding procedure in appeal, and powers of the Commissioner [Appeals] are contained in Sections 250 and 251 of 1.T. Act, which are reproduced below for ready reference: "250. (1) The Commissioner (Appeals) shall ... appellant either in person or by an authorized representative; (b) the Assessing Officer, either in person or by a representative. (3) The Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to adjourn the hearing of the appeal from time t (4) The Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make such

M/S Five Roses, Kanpur vs. J/DCIT-CC, Kanpur

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 272/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 153CSection 292C

M/S Five Roses, Kanpur vs. Dy, CIT-CC-1, Kanpur

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 153CSection 292C

Airovient Fans & Systems Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 638/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133(6)Section 194Section 194CSection 37(1)

Assessing Officer treated payment as bogus transaction and disallowed claim holding that said shell entity was non-existent at its registered address - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) noted that assessee had availed services of consultant in connection with contract awarded by BHEL; and that such payments were made by account payee ... cheques and payment included service tax on invoice and payee was duly registered with service tax department - Commissioner (Appeals) further noted that transaction took place in financial year 2012-13, relevant to assessment Page 5 of 6 I.T.A. No.: 638/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Airovient Fans & Systems Private Limited. year

Rakesh Kumar Somani, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 215/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Boradrakesh Kumar Somani, Ito-1, 10, Ramganj Road, Khandwa Vs. Khandwa (M.P) (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Azgps3988J Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 147

Counsel for the assessee fully supports this view. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in deleting the additions made. Grounds are dismissed. 10. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.” 7.3 Examining the facts of the instant

Om Infra Limited, Jaipur Rajasthan vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, we find no substantial question of law being involved in this appeal

ITA 811/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 801C(2)(b)Section 80I

amendment for rectifying any- such mistake which has been brought to its notice by the assessee, and where the authority concerned is the5 Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] (5) there is also a view that an assessment which is right at the time it was made with reference to the law prevailing

Gurupadaling Vikraktamath, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gulbarga

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

ITA 808/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri.Deepak Padmanabhan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Gale, Standing Counsel

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69A

deposits and added them U/s 69A of the Act, which clearly proves non application of mind by the Learned Assessing Officer. 5. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in not considering the above points before dismissing the appeal. 6. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in not giving proper opportunity

Mr. Muppuri Damodar, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(5), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the above observations

ITA 1231/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeymuppuri Damodar The Income Tax Officer #26/1, 7Th Main, Sb Colony Ward - 7(2)(5) Bsk Iii Stage, 7Th Block Vs. Bengaluru Bengaluru 560085 Pan – Ahppd9356E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 09.02.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2003-24/1060723928(1) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) In Respect Of Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.. 2. The Learned Cit[A] Is Not Justified In Dismissing The Appeal As Not- Admitted On The Ground That The Applicable Advance Tax Has Not Been Paid By The Appellant Before The Filing Of The Present Appeal Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel

Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 249Section 250Section 69A

payable by him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the Commissioner (Appeals) may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause

Usha Khetan, Borivali, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 33(1)(1), Bandra Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 7

ITA 2071/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Usha Khetan, Ito Ward 33(1)(1), Flat No. 1606, Samarpan Exotica, Kautilya Bhavan, Avenue 3, Vs. Western Express Highway, Food Near Videsh Bhavan, Bandra Corporation Of India, Borivali East, Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400066. Mubmai-400051. Pan No. Aexpk 6415 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sumit Mantri

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

held that Where assessee inspite of large number of Circle* has held that Where assessee inspite of large number of adjournments granted by Commissioner (Appeals) did not produce any adjournments granted by Commissioner (Appeals) did not produce any adjournments granted by Commissioner (Appeals) did not produce any document in respect ... grounds of appeal, nor made written or oral document in respect of grounds of appeal, nor made written or oral submissions, Commissio submissions, Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in proceeding exparte ner (Appeals) was justified in proceeding exparte against assessee. against assessee. 5.4 Hon. ITAT (Cochin Bench

DCIT CC, 4(3), Mumbai vs. Nouveau Global Ventures Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3611/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal, &For Respondent: Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 153CSection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ

DCIT CC, 4(3), Mumbai vs. Nouveau Global Ventures Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3609/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal, &For Respondent: Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 153CSection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ

DCIT CC, 4(3), Mumbai vs. Nouveau Global Ventures Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes whereas cross statistical purposes whereas cross-objections of the assessee are of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3608/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal, &For Respondent: Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR &

Section 153CSection 68

liberty to make, or cause to be made, "further inquiry", in terms of sub which reads as under: which reads as under:— "The Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make issioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make issioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make ... further inquiry and report the result of the same to the to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to the Commissioner (Appeals)." Commissioner (Appeals)." 39. The further inquiry envisaged under Section 250(4) quoted above is generally 39. The further inquiry envisaged under Section

M/S. Halo Technologies and Training Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1772/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule, [Addl. CIT] Sr.DR

Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. 3. We observe that vide order dated 24.11.2022 for the A.Y. 2014- 15 passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)/NFAC in Assessee’s own case, wherein the delay in filing the appeal against the same levy of late fee u/s 234E ... days, which was condoned by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on similar facts and circumstances by observing “that taking an adverse view solely on the reason of prolonged delay, will deny the Assessee of proper justice based on the merits of the case. Hence, taking a liberal view in the matter