“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)

Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4) Now Ward- 1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 159/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.158/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.159/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer Harivallabh Society बनाम/ Ward-3(4) V/S. Naroda Now Ward-1(2)(1) Opp. Devi Cinema Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 382 345 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Audpp 9058 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 06/01/2023 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-2012. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.158/Ahd/2023:

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

taxmann.com 282 (Bom), wherein it was held that where the Assessing Officer failed to make a reference to the DVO under section 55A, the Commissioner (Appeals) has the power under section 250(4) to direct such reference. It was further held that the valuation by the DVO is a mandatory

Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4) Now Ward- 1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 158/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

The Farmer Bank Staff Co-Operative Society Ltd, Fort, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chambers

ITA 5686/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Sushant Alme, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH

Babubhai Kanjibhai Sakariya Legal Heir of Late Smt. Ujiben Kanjibhai Sakariya, Jetpur vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 185/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 147

also in law in directing to make assessment in case of a deceased person. 3. Your Assessee prays that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and impugned assessment made in case of a deceased person may kindly be quashed. 4.Your Honour's assessee craves leave to add, to amend, alter

Kalyani Koley, Howrah vs. CIT(A), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 253(3)

wife, who'also needed special care. Apart from the above facts, Mr. Kuntal Kumar Koley, being a layman, also misunderstood that even if the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by your petitioner, no demand of income tax could arise in your petitioner's case since in the order dated ... assessment year 2013-14 in the case of your petitioner. After going through the annexure of the said notice, he understood that since the Commissioner (Appeals), by the said order dated November 1, 2023, dismissed the appeal filed by your petitioner, said penalty notice was issued by the National Faceless

Falguni Nevatia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 33(4), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 941/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subrata Aich, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

absence of any such finding, it is held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was utterly perverse and rightly interfered by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal re-appreciated the factual position and agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal apart from taking into consideration, the legal effect

Krya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Limited Deoli, Deoli Tonk vs. ITO Tonk, Tonk

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed and the order of the AO is confirmed

ITA 135/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Mrs. S. K. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234aSection 250Section 80P

income tax by the Assessing Officer, ward, Tonk on file bearing permanent Account Number AAAA6269L. 3. That I preferred an appeal to the commissioner (Appeals) Jaipur against the Assessing Officer’s order of assessment dated 31.10.2019/21.01.2020 for the assessment year 2017-18. 4. That I received the order ... said Commissioner (Appeals) Faceless (NFAC) on 29.12.2024. 5. That being aggrieved by the said order the said order was either not received and on random visiting the website such order of CIT(Appeals) was found. 6. That soon thereafter I got in touch with my advisors and had the appeal

Matrix Automotive, Mumbai vs. Ward 41(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2607/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Matrix Automotive Income Tax Officer-Ward Shop No. 1,2,3,4 Ground Floor, 41(3)(2), Mumbai Business Classic, Chincholi Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, G Block Bunder Road, Malad West, Bkc, Gilban Area, Bandra Mumbai 400064 Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 Pan No. Aaxfm5446P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Dipesh Ruparelia (Virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234DSection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Rules. For ready reference said rule is reproduced as under: “46A (1) The appellant shall not be entitled to produce before the [Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)) (or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)), any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced by him during the course

Om J J Swa Vishwashanti Dham Nirman Sanstha, Verul vs. ITO Exemption Ward, Aurangabad

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

ITA 2090/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

have studied the decisions relied by the ld.AR. 8.2 Section 251 of the Act is reproduced as under : 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 an order ... first appellate authority the assessee had filed letter dated 19th September 2017, seeking withdrawal of the appeal. Taking note of the said letter, learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed assessee's appeal in limine without deciding it on merit. Therefore, the issue which arises for consideration before me is, whether

Kalpesh Kumar Ramanlal Shah, Davangere vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Davangere

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1169/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., JCIT-DR

Section 11Section 119Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80I

also dealt with the issue “wherein the form 10B was filed during the course of appellate Page 4 of 7 proceedings before the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the benefit of section 11 of the Act to the Assessee” and the Tribunal upheld the said decision of the Ld. Commissioner

Shyam Lal Suthar, Jodhpur vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 791/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar Gehlot, Addl. CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

initiated penalty under section 270A. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred the appeal, before Ld. CIT(A) . The Commissioner (Appeals), NFAC, by order dated 30.08.2024, confirmed the addition holding that the assessee failed to produce requisite evidence from the U.S. entity. Therefore the investment

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur vs. M/S. Adarsh Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Sirohi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

ITA 212/JODH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Advocate and Shri Mukesh Soni, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 33Section 35Section 40Section 56Section 5ASection 67(1)Section 73

provisions of banking law—the first appellate authority is duty-bound to adjudicate each material ground and objection raised by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner (Appeals) must record specific findings with cogent reasons on each such issue and render a speaking order. Mere reliance on an earlier characterization ... assessee’s “status”, or on the conclusions reached in preceding assessment years, cannot absolve the Commissioner (Appeals) from addressing the Assessing Officer’s pointed objections for the year under consideration. Such non-adjudication amounts to a procedural infirmity warranting a remit for fresh consideration. It is a settled proposition

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur vs. M/S. Adarsh Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Sirohi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

ITA 211/JODH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Advocate and Shri Mukesh Soni, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 33Section 35Section 40Section 56Section 5ASection 67(1)Section 73

Smt. Satyawati Marwaha Through Legal Heir Sh, Chander Sheikhar Marwaha, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 347/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

illegitimately claiming long-term capital gain exemption under section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income - Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant documents provided by assessee, including bills of purchases, broker account copies, bills for 26 I.T.A. Nos. 346 & 347/Asr/2024 Assessment Years ... cheque, establishing their genuineness and, thus, he directed Assessing Officer to delete addition of LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38) - Tribunal upheld Commissioner (Appeals) decision stating that there was no evidence implicating assessee or broker in any wrongdoing related to SNCFL script - Whether in view of concurrent findings

Smt. Satyawati Marwaha Through Legal Heir Sh. Chander Sheikhar Marwaha, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 346/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

Kirti Karsandas Nayak, Umbergaon vs. ITO Ward-5, Vapi

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

ITA 659/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Kirti Karsandas Nayak, Ito Ward-5, Plot No. 244/28, Gidc, Fortune Square, Chala Road, Umbergaon-396171. Vs. Vapi-396191. Pan No. Abbpn 3355 M Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Parin Shah, CA

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

impugned appellate order, it transpires that the assessee had remained that the assessee had remained ex parte before the learned before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), and that there had also been a delay in Commissioner (Appeals), and that there had also been Commissioner (Appeals), and that there had also been ... presentation presentation presentation of of of the the the appeal appeal appeal before before before him. him. him. The The The learned learned learned Commissioner (Appeals), taking note of the delay, dismissed the Commissioner (Appeals), taking note of the delay, dismissed the Commissioner (Appeals), taking note of the delay, dismissed

Pannalal Rampher Yadav, Silvasa vs. ITO, Silvassa

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

ITA 647/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

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

Section 250(6)Section 69A

adjudication. 3. On perusal of the record, it transpires that the assessee did not respond to the notices of hearing issued by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who consequently dismissed the appeal in default. The relevant extract from the impugned appellate order records that several notices were duly issued and served ... through the registered e-mail address of the assessee, but no response was forthcoming. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, concluded that the non-appearance was deliberate and that the assessee was not interested in pursuing his appeal. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) placed reliance upon the decisions

Sanjay Sivabhagwan Keyal, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 636/SRT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Sanjay Sivabhagwan Keyal Ito, Ward – 2(3)(4), Flat No.304, 3Rd Floor, Room No.613, Vatika Township, Near Model, Vs. Aaaykar Bhavan, Township, Parvat Patia Majura Gate, Surat - 395010. Surat - 395002. Pan No. Adspk 6097N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri J.K. Chandnani, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rasesh, CA

Section 144Section 148Section 69A

convenience. We therefore explanation resting on conjecture and convenience. We therefore uphold the finding of the learned Commission uphold the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in er (Appeals) in sustaining the addition. The sustaining the addition. The Ground No. 2 of the of the appeal of the assessee accordingly

Sumitlal, Surat vs. ITO, Surat

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

ITA 545/SRT/2025[201011]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Sumitlal, Ito 101-B/2, Sanskrut Flats Umra, Aayakar Bhavan, Bharthana, Vs. Surat-395007. Surat-395007 Pan No. Acxpl 1238 Q Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Nitin Paharia, CA&

Section 144Section 251(1)(a)Section 69

newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, Commissioner (Appeals) in case of order of assessment made Commissioner (Appeals) in case of order of assessment made Commissioner (Appeals) in case of order of assessment made ... reproduced as under 251(1) In dis Act is reproduced as under 251(1) In disposing of an appeal, posing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers

Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(2), Surat

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

ITA 272/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel, Ito Ward-2(3)(2), 84, Angreji Faliyu, Opp. Post Income Tax Office, Majura Gate, Office, Amroli, Surat-394107. Vs. Surat-395001. Pan No. Bczpp 8713 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate

Section 148Section 50C

considered by the ld CIT(A), we accordingly set aside the Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel 9 Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the matter to his file ... opportunity to both sides. The learned Commissioner affording due opportunity to both sides. The learned Commissioner affording due opportunity to both sides. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) shall also (Appeals) shall also after considering submission of the assessee after considering submission of the assessee adjudicate upon the other other grounds simultaneously