← 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)

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3036/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona parameters

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3035/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona parameters

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3034/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona parameters

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3033/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the open to the appellant/assessee to have supported the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona Commissioner (Appeals), based on the ground that the jurisdictiona parameters

Shrimati Saraswati Manuja Education and Well Living Society, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward Exemption 2(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 663/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat:Ita No. _663/Del/2023 [Assessment Year: 2020-21

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

aspects, learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) dismissed the 7 appeal of the assessee as not maintainable. 7. Aggrieved against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), assessee is in appeal before me. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee attended the hearing and submitted that

Country Inn & Suits by Raddison, Inn, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2) (1)International Taxation, Newdelhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2224/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

finding that there is no change in the nature of services over the years, though, the assessee has entered into fresh agreements. Whereas, learned Commissioner (Appeals), to overcome the decisions rendered by the Tribunal and Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Sheraton International Inc. (supra) proceeded ... Treaty. For holding the payment received by the assessee to be in the nature of FIS under Article 12(4)(a), learned Commissioner (Appeals) has attempted to link the Centralized Services Agreement entered into by the assessee with License Agreement entered into by the Indian Hotels with group affiliates

Radisson Hotels International Incorporated, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(1)(2), International Taxation, Delhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2223/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

finding that there is no change in the nature of services over the years, though, the assessee has entered into fresh agreements. Whereas, learned Commissioner (Appeals), to overcome the decisions rendered by the Tribunal and Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Sheraton International Inc. (supra) proceeded ... Treaty. For holding the payment received by the assessee to be in the nature of FIS under Article 12(4)(a), learned Commissioner (Appeals) has attempted to link the Centralized Services Agreement entered into by the assessee with License Agreement entered into by the Indian Hotels with group affiliates

Radisson Hotel International Incorporated, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the results, appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2222/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhuvnesh Kulshrestha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

finding that there is no change in the nature of services over the years, though, the assessee has entered into fresh agreements. Whereas, learned Commissioner (Appeals), to overcome the decisions rendered by the Tribunal and Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Sheraton International Inc. (supra) proceeded ... Treaty. For holding the payment received by the assessee to be in the nature of FIS under Article 12(4)(a), learned Commissioner (Appeals) has attempted to link the Centralized Services Agreement entered into by the assessee with License Agreement entered into by the Indian Hotels with group affiliates

Netafim Ltd., Gujarat vs. DCIT Circle- 2(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed

ITA 366/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16

Service Agreement by treating it as FTS in terms with Article 13 of the treaty. The assessee contested the aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner (Appeals). After taking note of the submissions of assessee and the ratio laid down in certain judicial precedents, learned Commissioner (Appeals) agreed with the assessee that ... would be applicable to the assessee. 4 | P a g e ITA Nos.1092/Del/2020 & 366/Del/2021 AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 5. Having held so, learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that assessee’s receipts under IT and SAP Service Agreement would fall under Article 12(4)(a) of India – Portugal DTAA as such

Netafim Ltd., Gujarat vs. DCIT Circle- 2(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed

ITA 1092/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16

Service Agreement by treating it as FTS in terms with Article 13 of the treaty. The assessee contested the aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner (Appeals). After taking note of the submissions of assessee and the ratio laid down in certain judicial precedents, learned Commissioner (Appeals) agreed with the assessee that ... would be applicable to the assessee. 4 | P a g e ITA Nos.1092/Del/2020 & 366/Del/2021 AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 5. Having held so, learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that assessee’s receipts under IT and SAP Service Agreement would fall under Article 12(4)(a) of India – Portugal DTAA as such

Shree Saurastra Ka;Akendra Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Rajkot vs. The ADIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 55/RJT/2023[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 254Section 254(2)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

vide order dated 04.01.2022 passed for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeals:- “1. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in upholding the rejection by the CPC of Shri Saurashtra Kalakendra Co-op. Housing Societyvs.ADIT Asst.Year ... application for rectification of intimation u/s 143(1) made by the Appellant. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi failed to appreciate that the denial of claim for deduction u/s 80P by CPC u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act, being a mistake, it ought to have

Pravina Navin Dedhia, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1701/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Maulik ChoksiFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta
Section 147Section 68Section 69C

capital gain and considered the amount of Rs.1,74,552 as unexplained credit and it was added in the income of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition holding that the Assessing Officer had not discharged his onus and there was no material or evidence with the Assessing Officer ... come to the conclusion that the transaction shown by the assessee was a bogus transaction. The Commissioner (Appeals) took the view that if a company was not available at the given address, it could not conclusively prove that the company was non-existent. The Tribunal took into consideration that

ITO 17 (2)(4), Mumbai vs. Neumec Builders & Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6423/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 50C

that the power to re-open an assessment cannot be exercised to re-open issues that formed the subject matter of an appeal to Commissioner (Appeals). 14. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid findings, we affirm the conclusion reached in the impugned order that the second assessment order dated 31/08/2017

Vinod Kumar Sharma, Delhi vs. AO Ward 71(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 233/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 115BSection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(va)

before the learned CIT(Appeals), who also sustained the disallowance and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, no one attended the hearing. 4. It is seen from the record ... respect of contribution details in deposit of ESI and PF contribution after the prescribed period as mentioned in their order. 7. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the issue by observing as under: “10.22 In the instant appeal also, the issue involved had conflicting judgments from the different Hon'ble High

Pratap Singh Yadav, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7 Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1898/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17 Prtatap Singh Yadav, Versus Dcit, Central Circle 7, 510, Sector 31-32A, Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan: Aahpy8387M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Virendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 153C

shall be deemed to have never been issued. Accordingly, we quash the impugned assessment order. As a natural corollary, the order of ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside. 14. Since, we have allowed assessee’s appeal on the legal ground, rest of the grounds, having been rendered academic

ACIT, CC-14, Delhi vs. Rama Pashu Aahar Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as indicated above and

ITA 1862/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Versus Acit, Central Circle 14, C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South New Delhi. Extension, Part-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaccr1144B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle 14, Versus Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., New Delhi. C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

number of judicial precedents submitted in the legal compilation. 4. Drawing our attention to paragraph No. 7.4 of the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), learned departmental of communicating the assessment order, DIN could not be generated. However, he submitted, after obtaining approval of Chief Commissioner of Income ... shall be deemed to have never been issued. Accordingly, we quash the impugned assessment order. As a natural corollary, the order of ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside. 10. In view of our decision on the additional ground, rest of the grounds raised by the assessee have become academic. Hence

Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Bulandshahr vs. ACIT, CC-14, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as indicated above and

ITA 1456/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Versus Acit, Central Circle 14, C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South New Delhi. Extension, Part-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaccr1144B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle 14, Versus Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., New Delhi. C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

number of judicial precedents submitted in the legal compilation. 4. Drawing our attention to paragraph No. 7.4 of the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), learned departmental of communicating the assessment order, DIN could not be generated. However, he submitted, after obtaining approval of Chief Commissioner of Income ... shall be deemed to have never been issued. Accordingly, we quash the impugned assessment order. As a natural corollary, the order of ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside. 10. In view of our decision on the additional ground, rest of the grounds raised by the assessee have become academic. Hence

Dominic Savio Dasilva, Usa vs. CIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1403/DEL/2021[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 69A

Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Against the assessment order so passed, assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 379 days. Explaining the delay in filing the appeal, the assessee submitted that the chartered accountant, who was looking after the income ... Therefore, there was delay in filing the appeal. The aforesaid submission of the assessee did not find favour with learned Commissioner (Appeals), who proceeded to dismiss assessee’s appeal in limine without condoning the delay. 4. We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. Before

Benudhar Gokulanand Biswal, Mumbai vs. National E Assessmet Centre, Mumbai

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

ITA 202/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalebenudhar Gokulanand Vs. National E Assessment Biswal, Centre, H 302, Room.No 401,2 Nd Shanti Complex, Floor, E Ramp, Saki Vihar Road, Jawaharlal Nehru Powai, Stadium, Mumbai – 400072, New Delhi-110003. Pan/Gir No. : Adopb9106B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Tanmay Phadke.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Naina K Kumar.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed 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 & As Per The Law, The National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["The Learned Commissioner (Appeals)]Despite Concluding That The Agreement For Sale Was Benudhar Gokulanand Biswal., Mumbai. Entered Into On 13.07.2009 (I.E. Prior To 01.04.2017), Failed To Appreciate That The Provisions Of Section 56(2)(X) Of The Act Which Was Inserted Vide Finance Act, 2017 & Made Expressly Applicable From 01.04.2017 Are Not Applicable To The Facts Under Consideration. The Addition Of Rs. 9,88,343/(50% Of Rs. 19,76,686/-) As Confirmed By The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) Under Section 56(2)(X) Of The Act Is Bad In Law & May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Mr.Tanmay Phadke.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Naina K Kumar.DR
Section 143(1)Section 56(2)(x)

facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per the law, the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["the learned Commissioner (Appeals)]despite concluding that the agreement for sale was Benudhar Gokulanand Biswal., Mumbai. entered into on 13.07.2009 (i.e. prior to 01.04.2017), failed to appreciate that ... applicable to the facts under consideration. The addition of Rs. 9,88,343/(50% of Rs. 19,76,686/-) as confirmed by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 56(2)(x) of the Act is bad in law and may be deleted. 2. Without prejudice to the above

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Kundan Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1035/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Circle – 2(1)(1) Vs. M/S. Kundan Jewellers Room No. 561, 5Th Floor Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 223, Sm Patil Bldg, Sv Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400058. Pan/Gir No. : Aabck5770H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Nihar Ranjan Samal.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Siddharth Kothari.Ar Date Of Hearing 19.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29 .05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A), Delhi Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Nihar Ranjan Samal.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Siddharth Kothari.AR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

sales. Moreover, the Assessing Officer did not deal with the issue from this angle at all and such a reasoning adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal was based on surmises and imagination. [Para 4] In the result, order passed by the authorities below was to be set aside ... concluded that assessee received commission income from unknown source and treated the same as cash credit under section 68. On appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the action of the Assessing Officer was upheld. On appeal: 11. The Honble Tribunal in the case of Anantpur Kalpana Vs. ITO, [2022] 138 taxmann.com