← 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)

Satyendra Kumar Vyas, Bhopal vs. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 284/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 249

cause of delay in filing the appeal. He has contended that the A.O passed ex-parte order on 28.12.2019 against which the appeal before CIT(A) was filed on 29.12.2021 when the assessee Page 2 of 8 received the demand notice from the A.O and realized that the appeal against ... submitted that the assessee has explained the reasons in the affidavit which may be considered for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A). Since the appeal of the assessee has not been decided on merits therefore, the matter may be remanded for fresh adjudication

Keshavlal Chaturdas Patel, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Mehsana

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

ITA 667/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.667/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Keshavlal Chaturdas Patel The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 11, Anand Nagar Society Ward-2 V/S. Manav Ashram Mehsana Visnagar Road Mehsana – 384 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bihpp 3886 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The appeal before CIT(A) was Kesharlal Chaturdas Patel vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 filed by the assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred ... treating the cash deposits of Rs.12,10,000/- as income from unexplained sources under Section 69A. 2.1. The assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) issued multiple notices to the assessee during the appellate proceedings, but there was no compliance. Kesharlal Chaturdas Patel vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 Given

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle1(1), Kozhikode vs. N K Mohammed Ali and Bros, Kozhikode

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 244/COCH/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhacit, Circle 1(1) N.K. Mohammed Ali & Bros Aayakar Bhavan 6/1183 Kunhipari Building Mananchra Vs. Cherootty Road Kozhikode 673001 Calicut 673032 [Pan: Aacfn9210H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

Rs.1,98,20,016/- u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act on account of deemed dividend. Aggrieved by the order, appellant filed appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A)-1, Kochi vide its order dated 30.09.2010 in Appeal No. ITA No./C-171/08-09 not only confirmed the addition but also enhanced

Samir Arvind Thakker, Chembur vs. DCIT Circle-27(3), Mumabi, Navi Mumbai

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

ITA 2817/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, Sr. D/R
Section 69C

order and consequently failed to held that the reopening is bad in law. 3. The appellant submit that the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) should be condoned, the reopening should be held as bad in law and otherwise the addition made

Shashikant Krishna Shetty, Kalyan vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2), Kalyan

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

ITA 1879/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh VyasFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT, DR
Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 48Section 69

facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CITIA) erred in denied the condonation of delay of 103 days in filling appeal before CIT(A) as appellant prevented from reasonable cause and the reasons were beyond his control. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Ajinkyatara Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Vashi Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1231/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sushant N. AlmeFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

appeal before the CIT(A). In view of the explanation provided by the Appellant, the delay of 131 days in filing the appeal before CIT(A) deserved to be condoned. In any case, in our view, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the application for condonation

Bindu Nambiar, Mumbai vs. Bipin Kumar Gupta, Piramal Chamber Ward

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1229/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: the AO wherein the AO has issues notice dated 09-01-2024 to Assessee to submit the relevant details and explanation on or before 19-01-2024.” 3. We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The relevant facts that emerged from the material on record are that the Assessee, an individual, did not file return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. However, as per the information available with the Income Tax Department, the Appellant had undertaken transactions aggreg

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep NambiarFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

respect of credit card expenses and addition of INR.83,333/- in respect of professional receipt. 4. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred Appeal before CIT(A) against the Assessment Order, dated 26/12/2019. Before the CIT(A) it was contended on behalf of the Appellant that credit card expenses were personal

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 560/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 558/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 557/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 556/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 555/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 554/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.554 To 560/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2018-19) M/S. Church Educational Society, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaalc0017F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Muralimohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 23/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. MuraliMohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions against which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he has got instructions from the assessee to withdraw these appeals

Dwarka Das Agarwal, Park Circus vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)Kol, Chowringhee Square

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

ITA 1023/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mayank Rungta, A.RFor Respondent: Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250

income and demand of Rs. 542432/- was raised upon your appellant Being aggrieved from such illogical addition, your appellant preferred an appeal before CIT(A), NFAC seeking natural and legal justice. In response to the notice u/s. 250, your appellant submitted the written explanation along with a paper book which

Arya Vysya Sangha, Chitradurga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hubli

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1270/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)

That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) even though there was sufficient and reasonable cause for such delay. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred ... reasons stated by the assessee for the delay in filing appeals and we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) is directed to decide the appeal afresh as per law. The assessee is directed to update its email id, communication address and other

Arya Vysya Sangha, Chitradurga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hubli

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1269/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)

That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) even though there was sufficient and reasonable cause for such delay. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred ... reasons stated by the assessee for the delay in filing appeals and we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) is directed to decide the appeal afresh as per law. The assessee is directed to update its email id, communication address and other

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ncc3(1) Chennai, Nungambakkam vs. Shri Venkatesh Meghraj Kathare, Alwarpet

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

ITA 974/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:974/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Shri Venkatesh Meghraj Kathare, Of Income Tax, Vs. New No.205, Old No.128, Non-Corporate Circle 3(1), St. Mary Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aadpk 5251E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Seetharaman, C.A. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1061041943(1) Dated 16.02.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Non-Corporate Circle 3, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15 U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) Treating The Sale Of Land At Tiruvottiyur High Road As Long Term Capital Gain As Against Assessed By Ao As Short Term Capital Gain. For This, Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- 1) The Cit(A) Has Erred On The Facts Of The Case In Treating The Capital Gains On Sale Of Land At Tiruvottiyur High Road As Long Term Capital Gain Instead Of Short Term Capital Gain Without Appreciating That :

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri G. Seetharaman, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(47)Section 46(2)

treated this land as short term capital gain because it is sold within one year. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 4. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee held that the assets i.e., land at Tiruvottiyur received on liquidation of company and assessee held

ACIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Sml Isuzu Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 3

disallowance made by the AO in the aforesaid reassessment order dt. 27/09/2021 passed under section 147 of the Act, by preferring an appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) by the “impugned order” dt. 27/07/2022 however quashed the reassessment proceedings as being bad in law and not sustainable. Since

Gurindersingh Indrajeetsingh Nayyar, Nagpur vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle-2, Nagpur

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

ITA 61/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 56(2)(vii)

said appeal was filed with a delay of 121 days. The learned AR submitted that, there was a delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) based on reasonable grounds. The AR submitted that, the reassessment proceedings for AY 2014-15 were carried down during the COVID period and finally

Manipal Financial Services, Chennai vs. ITO, Business Ward Xv(4), Chennai

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

ITA 947/CHNY/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:947/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2005-06 Manipal Financial Services, The Income Tax Officer, 328, Plaza Centre, Business Ward Xv(4), Vs. 129 Gn Chetty Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aakfm 7449R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R.Anita, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/ 1061661390(1) Dated 28.02.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward Xv(4), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2005-06 U/S.147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 25.03.2013. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A)-Nfac Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S.147 Of The Act & Consequently Confirmed The Reassessment Order.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R.Anita, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 47

ICICI Bank and HSBC Bank not included in P&L account amounting to Rs.11,61,752/- & Rs.1,96,831/- respectively. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). Before CIT(A), the assessee has not challenged the reopening issue but now, before the Tribunal, the assessee has raised this issue