← All Phrases

“National Tax Tribunal”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29D)59 judgments

The decision most relied on for National Tax Tribunal is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (389 ITR 326), cited in 241 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on National Tax Tribunal

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
389 ITR 326 · 2016 · High Court
241
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit and adjudicate additional grounds of appeal if they are legal in nature or go to the root of the matter, even if not raised before lower authorities or filed belatedly.

Vardhan Birla v. CIT
204 ITR 312 · 1993 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has the jurisdiction to entertain an assessee's additional ground of appeal, even if the claim was not made before the Income Tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, provided the additional grounds are legal and based on facts already on record without requiring fresh investigation.

Judgments citing National Tax Tribunal

Sandhya Goel H.No.101217, Huda, Jagadhri, Haryana vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Panchkula, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 215/CHANDI/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: ShriSudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Hemant Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT, Panchkula

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 206/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Hemant Fabrics Pvt.Ltd., C-95, Mahendru Enclave, G.T.Karnal Road, New Delhi. Vs The Pcit, Panchkula. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm2810N अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp Hybrid Hearing Order The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (In Short ‘Cit') Dated 22.03.2023 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Three Grounds Of Appeal, However Its Grievance Revolves Around A Single Issue Namely

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Himasagar Krishna Muthappagari, Tirupati vs. ITO., Ward-2(3), Tirupati

ITA 687/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri M. Uday Teja, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

give effect to, any 11 Himsagar Krishna Vs. Pr. CIT, Tirupati finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Sanket Jhabak, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 479/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Sampat Lal Jhabak, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 478/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Smt. Pushpa Jhabak, Raipur vs. PCIT-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 237/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Smt. Tilottama Jhabak, Raipur vs. PCIT-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 236/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Smt. Sushila Devi Jhabak, Raipur vs. PCIT-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 235/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Sanjog Jhabak L/H of Late Gautam Chand Jhabak, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 234/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Sanjog Jhabak, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 233/RPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, Advocate
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Rajesh Choudhary, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 597/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Pawan Kumar HUF, Dayanand Nagar vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2679/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: BEFORESHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court.Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken in giving

Shri Trimbakeshwar De vs. Than Trust, Nashikvs.CIT (Exemption) Pune, Pune

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

ITA 1051/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1051/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

M/S Harish Chandra Baldewa, Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward-46(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 366/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.366/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Harish Chandra Baldewa ………. Appellant 493/B/17, Vikram Vihar, G.T. Road (South) Shibpur Howrah-711102 (Pan: Alipb4249H) Vs. Income Tax Officer ………… Respondent Ward-46(2), Kolkata. Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 11.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 09.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Revisionary Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income- Tax-16, Kolkata [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 04.03.2020. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Idemia Syscom India Private Limited, Noida vs. CIT(Tp), Delhi-2, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 647/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 263Section 92C

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, Cer-1, Kolkata.

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

ITA 1274/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

finding 20 ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, C.C-1(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1232/KOL/2023[AAACV9131E]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

finding 20 ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Kgvk Agro Limited, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Kolkata-2., Kolkata

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

ITA 549/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 549/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Kgvk Agro Limited,..................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Flat-3, 46B, Sridhar Roy Road, Kolkata-700039 [Pan: Aaacu9032H] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Kolkata-2, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Anuj Masaddi, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 25, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 19, 2024

Section 115BSection 2Section 263Section 68

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Ajay Kumar, Patna vs. Pr. CIT-1, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 29/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes of sub-section (2), the time taken

Divya Prakash, Bhojpur vs. Pr. CIT-1, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 24/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 80C

been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme Court. 7 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Divya Prakash Explanation.- In computing the period of limitation for the purposes