← 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)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Noida vs. Strawberry Farmer Agro Products, Noida

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4091/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Strawberry Farmer Agro Income Tax, Central Products Circle-I, Office Of The C-3, Sector-7, Noida, Deputy Commissioner Of Gautam Budh Nagar, Income Tax, Central Noida, Up 201301 Circle -0I, Noida, Noida, Up 201301 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxfs6899J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 251(1)(a)Section 69A

income of the assessee. Section 251(1)(a) amended with effect from 01.10.2024 reads as under:- 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers- (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reducе, enhance or annul the assessment. [Provided

Ishan Arora, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

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

ITA 669/JPR/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT a
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69C

vested with the power of condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The relevant portion of the statute is reproduced below: "(3) The Commissioner (Appeals) may admit an appeal after the expiration of the said period if he is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting

Nishtha Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 6(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1160/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

mandated in Section 249(1) of the Act. 3.3 As per Rule 45(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) must be filed electronically in Form No. 35, accompanied by the Grounds of Appeal (GOA) and Statement of Facts (SOF), duly signed and verified

Seetharaman Bakthavatsalam, Trichy vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1304/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Respondent: Mr.Karthik Dasari, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

issued by the Board from time to time which oblige him to give effect to the order dated 29-11- 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but this inaction constituted a patent error rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the AO is statutorily bound to give effect

Seetharaman Bakthavatsalam, Trichy vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1303/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Respondent: Mr.Karthik Dasari, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

issued by the Board from time to time which oblige him to give effect to the order dated 29-11- 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but this inaction constituted a patent error rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the AO is statutorily bound to give effect

Seetharaman Bakthavatsalam, Trichy vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1302/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Respondent: Mr.Karthik Dasari, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

issued by the Board from time to time which oblige him to give effect to the order dated 29-11- 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but this inaction constituted a patent error rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the AO is statutorily bound to give effect

Seetharaman Bakthavatsalam, Trichy vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1301/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Respondent: Mr.Karthik Dasari, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

issued by the Board from time to time which oblige him to give effect to the order dated 29-11- 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but this inaction constituted a patent error rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the AO is statutorily bound to give effect

Seetharaman Bakthavatsalam, Trichy vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Trichy

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1300/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Respondent: Mr.Karthik Dasari, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

issued by the Board from time to time which oblige him to give effect to the order dated 29-11- 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but this inaction constituted a patent error rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the AO is statutorily bound to give effect

Mamta Pathak, Thane vs. ITO Ward 1(2) Thane, Thane

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

ITA 3200/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2012-13 Mamta Pathak, Ito, Ward-1(2), 404, 4Th Floor, 6Th Floor, Shivam Apt., Vs. Ashar It Park Mohanji Sunderji Rd No.9, Wagale Estate, Raghunath Nagar, Thane, Thane, Maharashtra-400604. Maharashtra-400604. Pan : Alcpp3684Q (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Tanmay Phadke For Revenue : Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 15-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-10-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 07-03-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 192Section 69

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)] erred in dismissing the appeal on the reason of limitation without appreciating that the period of limitation did not 2 commence ... demand notice. Thus, the said observation may be reversed and the case may be remanded back to the file of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding on merits. 2.Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per the law, the learned

Avinissery Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Thrissur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Thrissur

ITA 569/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5Section 80Section 80P

only a 'draft order' and not a valid, or conclusive order. Section 250 of the Act confers the powers on the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear and decide appeals as the final adjudicating authority of the first appellate level against orders of the Assessing Officer. Such an order

Avinissery Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Thrissur vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Thrissur

ITA 556/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Alan P DevFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5Section 80Section 80P

only a 'draft order' and not a valid, or conclusive order. Section 250 of the Act confers the powers on the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear and decide appeals as the final adjudicating authority of the first appellate level against orders of the Assessing Officer. Such an order

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Taradevi Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 497/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

statements from 'entry operators', by rejectingthe assessee's revised return claiming exemption under section 10(38) for long-term capital gains. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) accepted assessee's claim, noting that shares were purchased via Account Payee Cheques, held in a DEMAT Account for over 12 months, and sold through

Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Aurangabad vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1239/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1239/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Ito, Ward-2(3), Sharadanand, Opposite Telephone Office, Aurangabad Ajabnagar, Aurangabad-431001 Vs. Pan : Aakcs4648D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 Date Of 27-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 72

case of Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (ITA No. 2336 of 2013, dated 25.04.2016), had set aside the impugned order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) holding that while dismissing assessee’s appeal in limine without deciding on merit, Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not exercised his power in consonance with the provisions ... 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

statements from 'entry operators', by rejectingthe assessee's revised return claiming exemption under section 10(38) for long-term capital gains. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) accepted assessee's claim, noting that shares were purchased via Account Payee Cheques, held in a DEMAT Account for over 12 months, and sold through

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Respondent: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

statements from 'entry operators', by rejectingthe assessee's revised return claiming exemption under section 10(38) for long-term capital gains. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) accepted assessee's claim, noting that shares were purchased via Account Payee Cheques, held in a DEMAT Account for over 12 months, and sold through

Surbhit Impex Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2570/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram Sr. Adv.& Shri Shashi Bekkal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, (CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 263Section 41(1)

transactions were eight to nine years old Assessing Officer treated amount due to creditors as assessee's income and added under section 41(1)- Commissioner (Appeals) deleted addition Tribunal upheld view of Commissioner (Appeals) - Revenue submitted before High Court that because liability was barred by period of limitation, same would ... debt Page 13 ITA No. 2570/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Surbhit Impex Private Limited and, thus, Tribunal was right in upholding view of Commissioner (Appeals) – Held .yes [Para 6] [In favour of assessee] 5.2 We also noticed that the assessee had paid liability of few creditors and in respect of remaining

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Megha Garg, Delhi

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

ITA 3488/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Income Tax Officer, Megha Garg, 1707 E-2 Block Civic Centre, 160 Saraswati Vihar Vaishali, New Delhi-110002 Vs Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Pan-Aecpg7098C Appellant Respondent

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68Section 69A

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 sales, and bank statements and held that purchases were ... 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

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Delhi vs. Ld. ITO, Ward 35(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3447/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22] Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Income Tax Officer, Ward-35(1), B-2/38, Ground Floor, E-2, Civic Centre, Delhi-110002 Ashok Vihar, Phase-Ii, Vs Delhi-110052 Pan-Aafhr8657H Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 270A

deem it necessary to reproduce the statutory provisions of section 270A of the Act “270A. (1) The Assessing Officer or 94[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may, during the course of any proceedings under this Act, direct that any person ... following, namely:— (a) the amount of income in respect of which the assessee offers an explanation and the Assessing Officer or 95[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied that the explanation is bona fide

Kemox Corporation, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITA 221/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. D.R
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 142Section 250Section 68

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

M/S Rarity Agencies Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2341/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

tribunal which exercise has not been done [para 99] 11. In such factual scenario, the Assessing Officers as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) have adopted an inferential process which is found to be a process which would be followed by a reasonable and prudent person. The Assessing Officers ... Commissioner (Appeals) have culled out proximate facts in each of the cases, took into consideration the surrounding circumstances which came to light after the investigation, assessed the conduct of the assessee, took note of the proximity of the time between the buy and sale operations and also the sudden