← All Phrases

“appeal before CIT(A)”

AppealsSection 246ASection 246A1,827 judgments

The decision most relied on for appeal before CIT(A) is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on appeal before CIT(A)

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

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. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

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.

New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
296 ITR 495 · 2008 · High Court
351
citing judgments

The High Court can return a reference unanswered if the assessee fails to appear or provide assistance. This illustrates the broader principle that appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution when a party does not effectively pursue their case.

Judgments citing appeal before CIT(A)

Ketan Krishna Belsare, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2653/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Praksh Kantketan Krishna Belsare Vs The Acit, Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai, 901, 9Th Floor, Maharishi A/1003, Panchsheel Heights Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 (West), Mumbai-400 067 Pan : Azhpb3987F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anil Thakkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR

penalty order should be considered as September 8, 2023, being the date on which the Appellant took note of the Order. 14. The Appeal to CIT(A) needs to be filed within 30 days from the date of service of the order. 15. The Appeal is being filed within ... CIT(A). Consequently, we condoned the delay. 5 ITA 2929/Mum/2025 Sanjay Jagdish Patel 8. Since we have condoned the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A), therefore, we restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the appeal on the merits of the grounds raised

Madison Teamworks Film Promotions and Entertainment Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- 10(2)(2), Mumbai

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3534/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 2(22)(e)Section 246ASection 250Section 264Section 264(4)Section 40A(3)

well settled principle that if a revision application u/s 264 is dismissed on procedural grounds, the appellant retains the right to file an appeal before CIT (A). However, this does not apply to the present case, as the appellant had already filed an appeal u/s 246A beforehand which was adjudicated ... inordinate delay in filling revision petition. Ld. PCIT suggested the appellant, while rejecting petition u/s 264, that the assessee may still prefer an appeal before CIT(A) by submitting an application for condonation of delay. However, such view of PCIT is not binding upon the CIT(A).  In this regard

The Kotla Bhari Milk Producers Society Ltd., Khanna vs. ITO, Khanna

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 381/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parveen Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(b)

Aneja, also failed to inform the society of the remedy of appeal, despite a communication from the jurisdictional Assessing Officer dated 29.12.2021 advising appeal before CIT(A).  Eventually, upon consultation with a new Chartered Accountant, CA Parveen Jindal, on 30.12.2024, it was discovered that refunds for later years had been

Ramesh Poonamchand Bansal, Radha Krishna Textile Market vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat, Aayakar Bhavan

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 372/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.372/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Ramesh Poonamchand Bansal Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Radha Krishna Textile Ward-2(2)(4), Surat, Aaykar Vs. Market, Ring Road, Surat-395 Bhavan, Surat-395 001 002 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aavpb 6088 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (प्र"थ" /Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 68Section 69

Bansal determined at Rs.1,95,82,240/- as against returned income of Rs.Nil. Aggrieved by the additions made by the AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). 4. The appellant filed various details and written submission before the CIT(A) and also relied on the decisions of CIT

M/S Chhanabhai Kanjibhai Patel, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 757/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 41(1)Section 68

genuineness of the transactions. Accordingly, he added Rs.7,22,420/- to the total income. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). 4. Before CIT(A), the appellant filed PAN of both the creditors and also ledgers for subsequent years where payments have been made

Marlow Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 3339/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Marlow Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. Ito, Ward-20(2)(1), Mumbai Plot No. 62B, Marlow Chs Ltd. Vs Room No. 216, 2Nd Floor, Sir Pochkhanawala Road, Worli, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400030. Lalbaug, Parel, [Pan No. Aaaam5247J] Mumbai-400020. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 254(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

been consistently held show by a series of decision. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that delay in filing appeal before CIT(A) may be condoned and appeal may be decide on merit. 4. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Alodie Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1730/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Alodie Estates Pvt. Ltd. 2Nd Income Tax, Central B-4/43, Floor, Safdarjung Circle-2, New Delhi Enclave, New Delhi-110029 Pan No.Aaica1782G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 68

reply made by the assessee company, the AO completed the assessment. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed the appeal before CIT(A),who vide order dated 29.01.2016 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the revenue

Navnitbhai Jerambhai Desai, Surat vs. ITO, Ward- 3(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 136/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.136/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Navnitbhai Jerambhai Desai Income Tax Officer 44, Vaikunthdham Society, Vs. Ward No.3(2)(1), Surat, Laxmikant Aashram Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Katargam, Surat-395 004 Gate, Surat-395 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afzpp 3076 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (प्र"थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, ‘The Act’) Dated 13.12.2024 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, ‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao’) U/S 144 Of The Act Dated 26.11.2019. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.13,68,000/- On Account Of Unexplained Income U/S 69A R.W.S. 115Bbe.

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

levied tax @ 60% u/s 115BBE of the Act. Aggrieved by the addition made by AO, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 3. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed written submissions and forwarded/uploaded various explanations and details as had been submitted before the AO. The CIT(A) observed that nothing

Gurjeet Singh C/O Mangat Filling Station Rahon Road, Machhiwara District Ludhiana, Ludhiana vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-5 Khanna Jao the Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Khanna District Ludhiana, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1188/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1188/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Gurjeet Singh, The Ito, C/O Mangat Filling Station, बनाम Ward-1, Rahon Road, Khanna Vs. Machhiwara, Distt. Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Ajsps9042H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 69A

made. 1188-Chd-2024 Gurjeet Singh, Ludhiana 8 7. Aggrieved with the order of the Assessing Officer, the Assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) who has confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee argued at length

Vishal Vasudevbhai Modi, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 986/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-D.R
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

order which are submitted to be distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the assessee. 5. The assessment order is being under appeal before CIT(A) there was no justification for the PCIT to invoke the provisions of section 263. 6. On the facts of the assessee no order

Tejas Arvindkumar Desai, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(3), Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 516/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Tejas Arvindkumar Desai Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 202/302, Guru Pushya Ward-1(3)(3), Surat, Income Tax Vs. Apartment, Maskati Plot, Officer, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Parle Point, Surat-395 007 Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipn 4702 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

reply or explanation. Hence, AO added Rs.2,83,68,387/- u/s 69 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). 4. The appellant filed written submission before CIT(A) in response to the notices issued by him. He filed an affidavit and submitted

Salim Muradali Virani, Silvassa vs. The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi

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

ITA 192/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.192/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Salim Muradali Virani Assistant Commissioner Of Income- बनाम/ Shop No.3/6/8/12, Natwar Tax, Circle-Vapi, 8Th Floor, Fortune Vs. Apartment, Besides Dena Square-Ii, Above Tbz, Chala, Vapi- Bank, Amli, Silvassa-396 230 396 191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aeipv 2664 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

added u/s 68 of the Act to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). ITA No.192/SRT/2024/AY.17-18 Salim M Virani 4. The appellant contended before CIT(A) that the actual cash deposited in the bank account during the period

Jurimatrix Services India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(3)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 92/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri K.R. Girish, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 10ASection 115JSection 144Section 156Section 234ASection 234BSection 263Section 270A

ITA No.92/Bang/2025 Jurimatrix Services India Private Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A"BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM

Ma Chimanraoji Kadam Gr Bigar Seti Sah Path Mar Saswad, Satara vs. ITO, Ward-3, Satara

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

ITA 2494/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

being located in a remote village and is dependent upon the tax consultant which justify to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before CIT(A) by virtue of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025 INSC ... therefore condone the delay of 67 days in filing the appeal before CIT(A) and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. So far as the merits of the case are concerned assessee could not file any details before the lower authorities. It is pleaded before us that the addition

Ashok Damodhar Gholap, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 2074/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

filing of appeals by consultant looking after the taxation matters and assessee took some time to find proper counsel and file the appeal before CIT(A). We observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a detailed order dealing with the delay in filing of the appeal and has finally dismissed

Jai Shivrai Pratishthan, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Ward-1(1), Pune

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

ITA 1673/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1673/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Respondent: Shri Kishor B. Phadke
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

delay of 414 days in filing the said appeal without going into merits of the case Reasons for delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A): 4. Around 2021, auditor of the trust namely Late Prakash Sitaram Dhekane who actively looked after income tax compliances of the appellant trust, unfortunately

I K Corporation, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(3)(2), Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 790/SRT/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.789 & 790/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Hybrid Hearing) I K. Corporation Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ E-407, Krishna Township, Ward -1(3)(2), Surat, Room No.203, Vs. Nr. Govindji Hall, Dabholi 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Anavil Road, Katargam, Surat-395 Business Center, Adajan Road, Surat- 004 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacfi 2599 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

Total income was determined at Rs.81,51,500/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). 6. There was delay of 437 days in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant has submitted application for condonation of delay, where it was submitted that the affairs ... make necessary compliance before the Income-tax authorities. However, the CA had not complied with the notices of the authorities or filed appeal before CIT(A) for reasons best known to her (CA). The appellant came to know about the delay in filing appeal when the deposit in the bank

I K Corporation, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(2), Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 789/SRT/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.789 & 790/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Hybrid Hearing) I K. Corporation Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ E-407, Krishna Township, Ward -1(3)(2), Surat, Room No.203, Vs. Nr. Govindji Hall, Dabholi 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Anavil Road, Katargam, Surat-395 Business Center, Adajan Road, Surat- 004 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacfi 2599 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

Total income was determined at Rs.81,51,500/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). 6. There was delay of 437 days in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant has submitted application for condonation of delay, where it was submitted that the affairs ... make necessary compliance before the Income-tax authorities. However, the CA had not complied with the notices of the authorities or filed appeal before CIT(A) for reasons best known to her (CA). The appellant came to know about the delay in filing appeal when the deposit in the bank

Mota Dadva Mahila Doodh Utpadak Sahkari, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 38/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot10 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.37 & 38/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Mota Dadva Mahila Utpadak Sahakari The Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) बनाम At Mota Dadva, Gondal, Rajkot Rajkot Gujarat-360311 Vs. Pan : Aakfm7170M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Ms. Monica Pandey, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Monica Pandey, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

careful consideration of the above facts and circumstances, as the appellant has failed to fulfill the necessary conditions for admission of appeal before CIT(A) as per sec. 249(4)(b), the present appeal is liable to be held as not eligible for admission. Mota Dadva Mahila Doodh Utpadak Sahkari

Mota Dadva Mahila Doodh Utpadak Sahkari, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 37/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.37 & 38/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Mota Dadva Mahila Utpadak Sahakari The Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) बनाम At Mota Dadva, Gondal, Rajkot Rajkot Gujarat-360311 Vs. Pan : Aakfm7170M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Ms. Monica Pandey, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Monica Pandey, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

careful consideration of the above facts and circumstances, as the appellant has failed to fulfill the necessary conditions for admission of appeal before CIT(A) as per sec. 249(4)(b), the present appeal is liable to be held as not eligible for admission. Mota Dadva Mahila Doodh Utpadak Sahkari