← 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)

Priyansi Corporation, Dist Rajkot vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for

ITA 408/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Narendrakumar Bhanwerlal Nimbavat HUF, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 407/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Mahavir Impex, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 406/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Champalal Company, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

ITA 405/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Oswal Agricomm Private Limited, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 404/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Oswal Petrochem, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for

ITA 402/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Shri Ramji Hamir Virda, Gandhidham vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 400/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee. The A.O. made addition to the assessee's income on the basis of loose papers without any other supportive evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Hon'ble Tribunal, both the Third Member agreeing with Judicial Member, held in para 11 as under. "Now looking at the paper

Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 110/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 109 & 110/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel on behalf of Shri Parin Shah A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

that the appellant should transfer 15% of the total Grants/subsidies/consumer contribution received during the year as against 5.28% offered by the appellant. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not considering that the facts of the year under consideration were totally different from that ... Returned income Intimation as per passed under section 143(1) of the Ad holding that the same is outside of his jurisdiction. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) ought to appreciated that the said Income itself formed base of the total income computed in the impugned assessment order. 4.0 The appellant craves

Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 109/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 109 & 110/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel on behalf of Shri Parin Shah A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

that the appellant should transfer 15% of the total Grants/subsidies/consumer contribution received during the year as against 5.28% offered by the appellant. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not considering that the facts of the year under consideration were totally different from that ... Returned income Intimation as per passed under section 143(1) of the Ad holding that the same is outside of his jurisdiction. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) ought to appreciated that the said Income itself formed base of the total income computed in the impugned assessment order. 4.0 The appellant craves

Robin Ramavtar Goenka, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

ITA 434/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69C

entire sum of the said undisclosed sales as income of the assessee for the assessment year 1994-95. Such addition was confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal, however, held that the entire sales could not have been added as income of the assessee, but only to the extent ... extent of Rs.10.85 lakhs was not found in the books of account. Such amount was included in the total income of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) gave substantial relief to the assessee and reduced the income on the basis of gross profit rate. The Tribunal confirmed the order

Salt Lake Sanskritik Sansad, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/KOL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 40/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-2024 Salt Lake Sanskritik Sansad,…………...……Appellant Sector-1, Trust Bhawan, Ca-49, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700064, West Bengal [Pan:Aaets4162K] -Vs.- Deputy Director Of Income Tax,................Respondent Circle Cpc, Bengaluru, Prestige Alpha, Post Bag No. 2, Electronic City Post, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 100, Karnataka Appearances By: Shri N. Kausic, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 30, 2025 O R D E R

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2

condone the delay in filing Form 10BB, but the assessee failed to do so. Therefore, the 3 Salt Lake Sanskritik Sansad ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 7. I have perused

Income Tax Officer- 23(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Uti Asset Management Company Limited Employees Provident Fund, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2022/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2022/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-19) Ito, 23(3)(1), Mumbai V/S. Uti Asset Management 5Th Floor, Room No. 525A, बिधम Company Ltd. Employees Piramal Chambers, Parel, Provident Fund Mumbai-400012 5Th Floor Doaa, Uti Tower, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatu2391J Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Jayant Bhatt/Shri FaheemFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna
Section 10Section 10(25)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

nature of an inherent power granted to the Central Board of Direct Taxes to entrust any income-tax authority other than a Commissioner (Appeals) to admit an application or claim for refund even belatedly and dispose of the same in accordance with

DCIT-CC-4(3), Mumbai vs. Era Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 3096/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Bleshri Girish Agrawal, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 92C

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-56 Mumbai, dated 09.05.2023 for the assessment year (AY) 2013- 14. The assessee has raised four grounds of appeal. (1) On the facts ... added to the income of assessee. 5. Aggrieved, by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Before Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee filed detailed written submission on all the additions. The submissions of the assessee on the addition on the basis of transfer pricing adjustment

Mita Chatterjee, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 5985/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Baldev Singh & Sons, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 43(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3103/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.3103/Del/2023, A.Y. 2021-22 Baldev Singh & Sons Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 14-A, Najafgarh Road, Income Tax, Circle-43(1), New Delhi Civic Centre, J.L. Nehru Road Pan: Aaahb4937M New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. G. S. Kohli, Ca Respondent By Sh. Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2023 Of The Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [Addl. Cit(A)]. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Learned Cit(Appeal) Had Failed To Appreciate The Written Submission & The Documents Filed Before Him & Thus The Justice Had Not Been Given To The Humble Appellant.

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 80I

application could not be taken into consideration. 5. The assessee, being aggrieved by the order of the assessing authority, filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), which was accepted and held that non-filing of the proof of certificate from the chartered accountant with the original return was not fatal ... assessee with the rectification application while considering the claim of the assessee for deduction under sections 80HHE, and 80GG of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee in full. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the revenue filed further appeal before the Tribunal

ACIT Circle-16(2), New Delhi vs. Maximal Infrastructure Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1253/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwalthe Acit, Circle 16(2) Vs. Maximal Infrastructure Room No. 308, 3Rd Floor, Private Limited C.R. Building, I.P. Estate R-13, 2Nd Floor, Greater New Delhi – 110002 Kailash-1 New Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacct3615R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rajkumari, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Virender Kumar Singh, Sr
Section 143Section 143(3)

Maximal Infrastructure Private Limited for deduction of interest was rejected on ground that said payment was penal in nature – Commissioner (Appeals) as well as Tribunal held that amount paid was not penal in nature as much as it was as per declared policy of Government and occasioned by failure

Datia Vishvanath Trading Company, Sheetla Ganj Indergarh vs. Central Circle Gwalior, Main Building, Gwalior

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

ITA 171/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)

payable by him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the Commissioner (Appeals) may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause

Pradeep Singh Aswal, Madhya Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2) Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh

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

ITA 164/AGR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

payable by him: Provided that, in a case falling under clause (b) and on an application made by the appellant in this behalf, the Commissioner (Appeals) may, for any good and sufficient reason to be recorded in writing, exempt him from the operation of the provisions of that clause

Ochhab Lal Jain, Udaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 429/JODH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

related issue is not before him. As the Section 251(1)(a) itself provides 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the 22[* * *] 30[Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers— (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment33 ... Supreme has held as under: "7. Appeals are provided under section 246 of the Act before the AAC and the Commissioner (Appeals). These appeals are by the assessee aggrieved by the orders mentioned therein. Any order made under section 143(3) is appealable and the powers of the appellate court

Ochhab Lal Jain, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udiapur, Udaipur

ITA 428/JODH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

related issue is not before him. As the Section 251(1)(a) itself provides 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the 22[* * *] 30[Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers— (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment33