← All Phrases

“first appeal”

AppealsSection 246ASection 246A5,395 judgments

HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 8055/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhcl Infosystems Ltd Vs. Dcit 806, 96, Nehru Place, Circle-25(2) South Delhi 110019 New Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaach 2420 C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68

completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2008 at total income of Rs.2,32,45,33,297/- after making various additions. 3. First appeal by Ld. CIT(A) was decided on 01.08.2013. Tribunal vide order dated 26.05.2017 deleted various disallowances and remanded the matter to Ld. AO qua issue

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2738/PUN/2025[2015-16(26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2737/PUN/2025[2015-16(26q-q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2736/PUN/2025[2015-16(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2735/PUN/2025[2015-16(24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2734/PUN/2025[2014-15(Q26-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2733/PUN/2025[2014-15(24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2732/PUN/2025[2013-14(26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2731/PUN/2025[2013-14(26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2730/PUN/2025[2013-14(26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2729/PUN/2025[2013-14(24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2728/PUN/2025[2013-14(24Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

DURGA MACHTECH PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1, PUNE

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2727/PUN/2025[2013-14(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing the first appeal, if any. The limitation in filing the appeal is not applicable when the jurisdiction is under challenge by the assessee. The assessee, therefore, prays

PRADEEP SHARDA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 223/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun25 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Pradeep Sharda Vs Acit 7, Inder Road, Dehradun Circle-1(2)(1) Uttarakhand -248001 Dehradun Pan-Adwps5692K Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 25.03.2026 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.09.2025 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Nashik [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Dehradun/10344/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 01.11.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Practicing Doctor & E-Filed His Return Of Income, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 2,16,70,906/- On 30.10.2017. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Making Additions Of Inr 15,84,870/- Comprising Of The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act Of Inr 5,05,195/- & Treating The Agricultural Income Of Inr 6,25,000/- As Unexplained Money U/S 69A Of The Act & Of Inr 4,54,675/- As The Addition U/S 68 Of The Act On Account Of Cash Credit.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 68Section 69A

addition u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash credit. 3. In first appeal, Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of INR 4,54,675/- made u/s 68 of the Act and confirmed the addition of INR 6,25,000/- made on account of agricultural income treated

BHANU PRATAP SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(3), KASGANJ

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 581/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Bhanu Pratap Singh, 4B/5 Opp Sir Vs. Ito, Ward –4(3)(3) Gangaram Hospital, Old Rajinder Kasganj Nag, New Delhi Pan : Brkps7571N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv. Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

comply the notices issued by the first appellate authority. Ld CIT(A) was thus, compelled to pass ex-parte impugned order, dismissing assessee’s first appeal. The non cooperative 2 | P a g e conduct of the assessee during the first appellate proceedings cannot be appreciated. However, in the interest

PRABHA DEVI GUPTA,GWALIOR vs. ACIT, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 568/AGR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Mar 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 09-10 Prabha Devi Gupta, Mittal Bhawan, Vs. Acit, Gwalior Hans Travels, Kampoo Road, Gwalior Pan : Aclpg8541M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

assessee was determined at Rs. 2,56,54,850/-. 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ld CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex-parte. 5. Assessee has approached this tribunal on the ground that ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions made

FAIZANE MADINA AGRA SOCIETY,AGRA vs. CIRCLE 1(1)(1)- AGRA, AGRA

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 551/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18 Faizane Madina Agra Vs. Circle 1(1)(1) Agra Society, Nagla Mewati Tajganj, H.O., Agra. Pan : Aaatf4716E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Akash Agarwal, Ca. Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

completed u/s. 143(3), vide assessment order dated 23.12.2019, assessing assessee’s total income at Rs. 41,39,653. 3. The aggrieved assessee preferred first appeal, which was dismissed ex-parte. 4. Assessee has approached this tribunal on the ground that ld CIT(A) had erred in confirming the said

SHABD PRATAP SATSANG,SHABD PRATAP ASHRAM vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250

adjournment prayer was rejected. Perused the records. Heard ld representatives for both the parties. 3. At the very outset it is noticed that first appeal was filed on 18.11.2022 against the assessment order dated 27.03.2019 passed u/s. 143(1) of the Act by a delay of about 1302 days ... hold that the delay has wrongly been refused to be condoned by learned CIT(A). We, accordingly condone the said delay in filing the first appeal before the first appellate authority. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dated 25.08.2025 is set aside

WATTSUN ENERGY,KAPURTHALA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAPURTHALA

In the result, this penalty appeal is also remanded back to the Ld first appellate authority to be decided in tandem with the quantum

ITA 625/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. Nos.625 & 626/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Wattsun Energy, Pir Chaudhary Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Road, Kapurthala, Punjab. Kapurthala. [Pan:Aabfw6696B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250Section 271FSection 272A(1)(d)Section 274

penalty proceedings initiated and subsequently imposed u/s 272A(1)(d),amounting to Rs. 10,000/-, for non compliance to notices dated 20/12/2019. 3.1 In first appeal proceedings, the assessee prayed for keeping the penalty appeal in abeyance on the ground that the appeal against the quantum is pending ... assessee, filed a copy of the notice u/s 148 dated 26/04/2018 issued by the AO , Khamgaon, Maharastra, and stated that the first appeal against quantum has been challenged on jurisdictional issue where I.T.A. Nos.625 and 626/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3 the proceedings has been initiated by a non-jurisdictional

PARMINDER SINGH MANES,ZIRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR

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

ITA 925/ASR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C.A. (Virtual)
Section 147Section 250

belatedly by 88 (eighty-eight) days and the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating that since no physical order in first appeal has been served on him, he was not aware of the very existence of the order , because he is technically competent to access ... amount of Rs.69.45 has remained unexplained , and the same has been added back to the total income , against which the matter carried in first appeal has remained unrepresented in spite of notices being issued on six separate dates (as evident from para – 5 of the appellate order), to the registered

Showing 1–20 of 5,395 · Page 1 of 270

...