← 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)

Prakash Bare, Bengaluru vs. DCIT Circle 2(2)(1), Koramangala, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1030/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year :2020-21

For Appellant: Shri. B. N. Pattabhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

ITAT (Delhi) has observed as follows 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on records. We find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has decided this issue by observing as under :-- 11.4.1 The assessing officer has raised objection to the admission of additional evidence on the ground ... interest of justice, we hereby admit the additional evidences filed by the assessee and restore the additional evidence to the file of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the Grounds of Appeal afresh after giving due opportunity to the assessee and considering the additional evidences so filed. The Appellant

Binal Vikash Bhardwaj, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 3462/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

section 250(6) of the Act which provides as under:- “Section 250(6) in the Income Tax Act, 1961 “(6)The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision

Binal Vikash Bhardwaj, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 3461/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

section 250(6) of the Act which provides as under:- “Section 250(6) in the Income Tax Act, 1961 “(6)The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision

Dhurba Saikia, Sonapur Bo vs. ITO, Ward North Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur

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

ITA 71/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 208Section 234B(1)Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 270A

Provided that, 2 in a case falling under clause (b) and] on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the 3 Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] 4 or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)] may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt

Dhurba Saikia, Sonapur Bo vs. ITO, Ward North Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur

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

ITA 70/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 208Section 234B(1)Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 270A

Provided that, 2 in a case falling under clause (b) and] on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the 3 Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] 4 or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)] may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt

Santosh Kumar Keshri, Patna vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna

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

ITA 226/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 226/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Santosh Kumar Keshri,………..…….…………Appellant Shop No. 3, Jaiswal Market, Sabji Mandi, Mithapur-800001, Bihar [Pan:Asapk1127E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Dc/Ac Circle-6, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Supriya Sharma, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 68Section 69A

Sundry Creditors to the total Income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act and the same figure of addition was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). The Assessee had provided the list of Sundry Creditors to the Ld. A.O. and the bank statements ... assessee being uncontroverted – CIT vs Chandela Trading Co. (P) Ltd | 2015 | 372 ITR 232 (Cal).” As claimed by the assessee during the proceeding with Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee is not acquainted with the laws and rules of the Act and was not in position to submit third party confirmation

Koshambh Charitable Trust, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-Exemption, Vadodara

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

ITA 741/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Malarkodi R., Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

therefore, could not be considered as an application of income, for charitable purposes under Section 11 of the Act. 4. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) agreed with this view, noting that the legal provisions under Section 11 of the Act clearly state that any income applied outside the approved objects ... donation served the broader charitable purposes of the trust and the assessee placed reliance on several judicial precedents to support its claim. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) was of the view that the case laws cited by the appellant were distinguishable and not applicable to the assessee’s set of facts

Soleone Tradelinks Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 603/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Malarkodi R., Sr. DR
Section 144

Chennai) (TM), the ITAT held that where assessee justified delay of 310 days in filing appeal before Tribunal by stating that Commissioner (Appeals)’s order was misplaced and forgotten and when same was found while sorting out unwanted papers, steps were taken for preparation of appeal, the delay in filing ... case, the assessee justified the delay only with reference to the affidavit of its director. In the said affidavit it was stated that the Commissioner (Appeal)’s order was misplaced and forgotten. It was found while sorting out the unwanted papers and thereafter steps were taken for the preparation

Rajvi Jewellers, Panchmahal vs. The Dy.CIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 232/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Respondent: Smt. Malarkodi R., Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 69B

received from the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer proceeded to rectify the apparent mistake under section 154 of the Act. 4. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee’s appeal against the rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act, by noting that the assessee had failed ... addition made by the Assessing Officer, arguing that the original assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was already under challenge. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that proceedings under sections 143(3) and 154 of the Act are independent of ITA No. 232/Ahd/2025 Rajvi Jewellers vs. DCIT Asst. Year

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1972/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

were also initiated separately for the unexplained money added under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. 5. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the grounds of delay in filing of appeal. The CIT(Appeals) noted that in Form ... assessee further submitted that the delay was unintentional and due to change in the authorized representative, which was a genuine cause. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) refused to ITA Nos. 1971&1972/Ahd/2024 Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 4– condone the delay and held that the appeal

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1971/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

were also initiated separately for the unexplained money added under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. 5. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the grounds of delay in filing of appeal. The CIT(Appeals) noted that in Form ... assessee further submitted that the delay was unintentional and due to change in the authorized representative, which was a genuine cause. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) refused to ITA Nos. 1971&1972/Ahd/2024 Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 4– condone the delay and held that the appeal

Ganapati Technology Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 485/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 485/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Ganapati Technology Services Pvt. Ltd.,…Appellant 6B, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aadcg2354D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-6(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kadel, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 271(1)(c)

appellant’s claim that he has not received any interest income during the impugned assessment year. He further submitted that the ld. Addl./Jt. Commissioner (Appeals) failed to acknowledge the documented financial instability of Awani Projects & Infrastructure Limited during the assessment proceedings. He further submitted that the appellant presented evidence

Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 444/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee was not interested in pursuing its appeal. Section 250(6) of the Act reads as under: “250. (6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. ” Further ... read with Explanation reads as under : 251. (2) The Commissioner (Appeals)shall not enhance an assessmen or a penalty or reduce the amount of refund unless the appellant had a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against enhancement or reduction. 4 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti Explanation. - In disposing of an appeal

M/S. Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-30(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 126/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 126/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 M/S. Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Ltd,…Appellant 15, India Exchange Place, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Abjfm7166M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………..…………..Respondent Ward-30(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)

Addl./JCIT(Appeals). 6. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders passed by the CPC and also Commissioner (Appeals). 6 M/s. Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Limited 7. I have heard both the sides. It is an undisputed fact that before intimation there is no show-cause

Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Trichy vs. Arulmigu Madhurakaliamman Temple, Siravachur

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1015/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1015/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Income Tax Officer, Arulmigu Madhurakaliamman Exemptions Ward, Temple, Trichy. Siravachur, Perambalur, Tamil Nadu-621 113. [Pan: Aacaa9147R] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami, Advocate, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025

For Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139Section 139(1)

Income Tax Act wef 01/10/2024 provides that in the case of appeal against an order of assessment made under section 144, the Commissioner (Appeals) is empowered to set aside the order of assessment and refer the matter back to the Assessing officer for making a fresh assessment. 5.9 In view

M/S. Alucast Engineering Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5264/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarm/S Alucast Engineering V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Company, 3/18, Ac बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 6(1)(1), Market,Tardeo Road, Room No. 504, Aayakar Tulsiwadi S.O., Mumbai–400 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 034, Maharashtra – 400020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aahca9486C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash,(CIT DR)
Section 147

mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. The same is reproduced here under for ready reference: "(6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision

Nisha Data Com Limited, Rourkela vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 Rourkela, Rourkela

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

ITA 174/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

this respect, it is relevant to examine the provisions of section 250(6) which are reproduced as under: “250(6) – The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision ... taxmann.com 348 (Madras) it has been held that a speaking order on merits with reasons and findings is to be passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on basis of ground raised in assessee's appeal; he cannot dispose the assessee's appeal merely by holding that Assessing Officer's order

Nisha Data Com Limited, Rourkela vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 Rourkela, Rourkela

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

ITA 173/CTK/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

this respect, it is relevant to examine the provisions of section 250(6) which are reproduced as under: “250(6) – The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision ... taxmann.com 348 (Madras) it has been held that a speaking order on merits with reasons and findings is to be passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on basis of ground raised in assessee's appeal; he cannot dispose the assessee's appeal merely by holding that Assessing Officer's order

DCIT, Circle 3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Vikas Kumar Chhajer, Vizianagaram

ITA 212/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

acceptable as in the event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions properly, obligation to conduct proper inquiry shifts to Commissioner (Appeals) and CIT(A) cannot simply delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground of lack of inquiry by the Assessing Officer

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 820/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

quashed Revenue contended that legal issue was not raised by assessee at earliest point of time namely, before Assessing Officer nor before Commissioner (Appeals) - High Court by impugned order held that assessee could not be prevented from raising question of jurisdiction which is an issue which goes to root ... issued a notice under section 142(1) and completed assessment estimating income of assessee from business by applying provisions of section 145 - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) did not adjudicate issue of legality of assessment, but nevertheless maintained order of Assessing Officer On second appeal, Tribunal rejected primary prayer of assessee