“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)

Arvind Ketaram Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4746/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Kumar

Section 132Section 153C

specifically disputes its correctness. The learned Commissioner he assessee specifically disputes its correctness. The learned Commissioner he assessee specifically disputes its correctness. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has proceeded on the assumption that since extracts of statements, (Appeals) has proceeded on the assumption that since extracts of statements, (Appeals) has proceeded ... placed by the learned Commissioner legally distinct concepts. The reliance placed by the learned Commissioner legally distinct concepts. The reliance placed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on Andaman Timber Industries is, with respect, misconceived and (Appeals) on Andaman Timber Industries is, with respect, mis (Appeals) on Andaman Timber Industries

Pravinbhai Mahadevbhai Ambani, Morbi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Morbi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statical purpose

ITA 231/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.231/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pravinbhai Mahadebhai Ambani Assisstant Commissioner Of बनाम Prop. Of Digvijay Coal Industries, Income Tax, Pachvati Society, B/H, Kanya Vs. Income Tax Office, Aayakar Chhatralaya, Samala Road, Vibhag, J.K. Chamber Morbi – 363641 National Highway-8, At Lalpar Morbi – 363642 Pan No. : Abipa6387K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01/2026 Order Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69

manner specified by the "[Assessing] Officer, the [Deputy Commis sioner (Appeals)] [, the [Joint Commissioner] or [the Joint Com-missioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals)], giving informa-tion in relation to such points or matters as, in the opinion of the 16 [Assessing] Officer, the "[Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] [, the [Joint Commissioner ... Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals)], will be useful for, or relevant to, any [enquiry or] proceeding under this Act” Page 5 of 6 Pravinbhai M. Ambani 10. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that

Amplex Projects Private Limited, Agartala vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle Silchar, Silchar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 333/GTY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245DSection 245D(4)Section 250

Officer and he cannot go into the realm of suspicion On appeal Held dismissing the appeal that the addition was rightly deleted by the Commissioner (Appeals) und the Tribunal. Requisite documents were furnished showing the existence of the shareholders from accounts and even their Income- tax details. From bank accounts

Smt Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

given the liberty to make, or cause to be made, "further inquiry", in terms of sub-section (4) which reads as under:- “The Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make such further inquiry as he thinks fit, or may direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry ... report the result of the same to the Commissioner (Appeals)”. 39. The further inquiry envisaged under Section 250(4) quoted above is generally by calling what is known as "remand report". The purpose of this enabling clause is essentially to ensure that the matter of assessment reaches finality with

Smt Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 610/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

Smt Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

Smt Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

Smt Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Smt. Asha B. Kadam, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1896/PUN/2024[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Smt. Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1895/PUN/2024[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Smt. Asha Bhagwanrao Kadam, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1894/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

Manish Bhavanji Bheda, Mumbai vs. DCIT 20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7252/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharymanish Bhavanjibheda Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Room No. 25, Vishwas Tax, Circle 20(1), Room No. 305, Piramal Niwas No. 9, Acharya Chambers, Dr. S. S. Rao Road, Lalbaug, Donde Marg, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400012. Pan/Gir No:Aekpb1041E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 250Section 68

Loan from ten Parties for which Loan Confirmation Letters allegedly not furnished: - On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Honorable Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.86,00,000/- in respect of Unsecured Loan from ten parties for which Loan Confirmation Letters allegedly ... Assesseee has filed Balance Confirmation Letters in the Remand Proceedings U/Rule 46A which is not considered at all by the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, the addition of Rs.86,00,000/- U/S 68 is bad in law and needs to be deleted. II. Addition of Rs.1,30,00,000/-in respect

Citizencredit Co-Operative Bank Limited (Manori Branch), Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS)-Ward 1(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 6429/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 2(19)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI 'C' BENCH BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Citizencredit Co Operative Bank Limited (Byculla Branch), Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS)-1(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 6424/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 2(19)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI 'C' BENCH BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Bharat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5832/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 69

assessee was not acceded to by the Assessing Officer. When the assessee took up the aforesaid issue before the first appellate authority, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in letter dated 18th July 2016, had clearly directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee all adverse materials / documentary evidences available with ... with all the adverse material and if, not so, whether he has provided them to the assessee as per the directions of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, from the aforesaid facts, it is patent and obvious that the addition of ` 42 lakh made on account of on–money payment

Bharat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5831/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 69

Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4197/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalteva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Vs Assessment Unit, Income Industries India Private Limited, Tax Department/Deputy 8Th Floor, C-Wing Time Square, Commissioner Of Income Andherikurla Road, Marol Naka, Tax, Circle 25(1), Opp Mittal Industrial Estate C. R. Building, Delhi- Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059, 110001 Maharashtra, India Pan: Bnspk7225H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Sohamdua, Adv& Sh. Abhiudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: 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.

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153r

section 260A in the relevant 17 Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 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 ... 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

Suresh Jat, Badnawar vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Dhar

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 693/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Jat, Ito, बनाम/ C/O S.V. Agrawal & Associate Dhar. Vs. Dadi Dham, 24-25, Joy Building Colony, Old Aplasia, Indore. (Pan: Anopj2666E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri Anup Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 194HSection 250Section 253Section 69A

assessing officer for making fresh assessment. Relevant extract of provision of section 251 is as under: - 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers- Page 12 of 20 Suresh Jat ITA No. 693/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2016-17 (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment

Radheshyam Agarwal, Bhopal vs. The PCIT, Central, Bhopal

ITA 417/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 253Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

The Kara Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Godhra

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

ITA 2414/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra Kamblethe Kara Dudh Utpadak Sahkari The Income Tax Vs. Mandli Ltd. Officer, Kara Kanjipani Ward-1, Godhra Jambughoda Godhra – 389 001 Panchmahal – 389 390

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: -None-

Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 270A

additions made by the Assessing Officer ex-parte in violation of the mandate under section 250(6) of the Act, which requires the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal through a reasoned order on each ground of appeal, irrespective of the appellant's absence or non-compliance ... learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC failed to appreciate that non-appearance of the appellant does not empower the Commissioner (Appeals) to dismiss or decide appeal on merits without real hearing. 5.0 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in confirming