← 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)

Moxa Diamond Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5169/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Prabhash Shankarito – 5(2)(1) Vs. Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 72/B-12, Tikam House, Road, New Marine Lines, Jss Road, Opera House, Mumbai – 400020 Girgaon S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 5(2)(1) 72/B-12, Tikam House, Jss Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Opera House, Girgaon Road, New Marine S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Lines, Mumbai – 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Kumar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 26.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also 5 Moxa Diamond Pvt ltd, Mumbai. forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions ... judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions properly, obligation to conduct proper inquiry

ITO 5(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Mokxa Diamond Private Limited, Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2208/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Prabhash Shankarito – 5(2)(1) Vs. Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 72/B-12, Tikam House, Road, New Marine Lines, Jss Road, Opera House, Mumbai – 400020 Girgaon S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 5(2)(1) 72/B-12, Tikam House, Jss Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Opera House, Girgaon Road, New Marine S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Lines, Mumbai – 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Kumar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 26.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also 5 Moxa Diamond Pvt ltd, Mumbai. forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions ... judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions properly, obligation to conduct proper inquiry

Athena Hisar Solar Power Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5372/DEL/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Athena Hisar Solar Power Pvt. Vs Dcit, Assessment Unit, Ltd., J5/132, Rajouri Garden, Civic Centre, E-2, Delhi-110027 Delhi Pan-Aaoca5969P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Salil Kapoor Adv. & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Dated 26.09.2024 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Raised Ground No. 2 Contending That The Final Assessment Order Dated 26.09.2024 Passed By The A.O. Is Time Barred By Limitation & Is Bad In Law, As It Has Been Passed Beyond The Time Frame Prescribed Under Section 153(1) Read With Section 153(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' For Short). The Ld. Assessee'S Representative Relying On The Ratio Laid Down By The Hon'Ble High Court Of Madras In The Case Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Athena Hisar Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 537 (Madras) & Also Plethora Of Orders Passed By The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench Sought For Allowing The Ground No. 2 Of The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

jurisdictional High Court under sub-section (2) of section 260A in the relevant case against the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be. (2) The Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner shall, on receipt of a communication from ... prescribed within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date of receipt of the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or of the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, stating that an appeal on the question of law arising

Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5199/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd., 5Th Floor, C/O Regus Circle-13(1) Business Center, Gurgaon C.R. Building, Delhi Road, South West Delhi- 110037. Pan-Aaacj2919A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Sumit Mangal, Adv. Ms. Radhika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Soumya Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Dated 23.10.2024 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. During The Course Of Hearing The Bench Has Asked The Assessee To File Specific Ground Of Appeal No.2 As Against General Ground Of Appeal No. 2 Taken. In Compliance, Assessee Vide Application Dt. 12.03.2025 Filed Under Rule 11 Of The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal Under. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Taken Reads As Under: Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

jurisdictional High Court under sub-section (2) of section 260A in the relevant case against the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be. (2) The Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner shall, on receipt of a communication from ... prescribed within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date of receipt of the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or of the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, stating that an appeal on the question of law arising

Shreyas Paradkar, Mira Road vs. ITO 1(1) Thane, Thane

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4721/MUM/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2023-24 Shreyas Paradkar (Individual), Ito Range 1(1), C/O Ca Rahul Godbole & Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, Vs. Associates, 204, Spectra, Kothrud, Road No. 162, Wagle Indl. Pune – 411038. Estate, Pan- Cvzpp8788C Thane – 400604. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shir H.V. Datar, (Virtually Present) Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar V., Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.06.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2023-24. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessee Has Claimed That He Opted For The New Tax Regime While Filing His Return Of Income On 25Th July 2023 By Entering All The Data On The Income-Tax Website. On Selecting The New Tax Regime, The Income-Tax Website Showed Tax Payable At ₹5,000 After Giving Credit For Tds & Therefore, The Assessee Paid The Respective Tax Payable & Submitted The Itr. The Assessee, On The Last Page Of The Itr, Computed The Tax As Per The New Regime, But Somehow, On The First Page Of The Return Of Income Filed, It Is Shown That The Assessee Did Not Opt For The New Tax Regime. This Was A Glitch On The Website, But Somehow, The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed Vide Intimation Dated 29.12.2023, Whereby The Taxable Income And/Or Return Filed By The Assessee Was Computed As Per The Old Regime & Not As Per The New Tax Regime Mainly For The Reason That The Assessee Failed To File The Relevant 2 Shreyas Paradkar (Individual)

For Appellant: Shir H.V. Datar, (Virtually Present)For Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar V., SR. D.R
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

regime, however, of no avail. Therefore, the assessee challenged the said intimation dated 29.12.2023 by filing a first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing and holding as under: - 5.1.3 The Finance Act 2020 has inserted a new section 115BAC of Income ... nature. However, the same should be made available before processing the return of income. 8. From the facts as observed above by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), it clearly appears that in the 1st column with regard to exercising the option for the new tax regime, the assessee had replied specifically

Genpact India Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, OSD Range-10, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 5017/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalgenpact India Private Limited Vs Assessment Unit, Income 12A, Ground Floor,K Prakash Tax Department, 2Nd Floor, Deep Building 7 Tolstoy Marg, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Baroda House, S.O. Baroda Stadium, New Delhi House, Delhi Pan: Aabce4461B Appellant Respondent Genpact India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner Of 12A, Ground Floor, Prakash Income Tax (Osd), Range-10 Deep Building 7 Tolstoy Marg, Central Revenue Building, Baroda House, S.O. Baroda Ito, New Delhi-110002 House, Delhi Pan: Aabce4461B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv (Virtual) &Ms.Vyushtirawat, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

jurisdictional High Court under sub-section (2) of section 260A in the relevant case against the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be. (2) The Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner shall, on receipt of a communication from ... prescribed within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date of receipt of the order of 29[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or of the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, stating that an appeal on the question of law arising