← All Phrases

“first appeal”

AppealsSection 246ASection 246A5,395 judgments

The decision most relied on for first appeal is CIT v. Union Tyres (240 ITR 556), cited in 135 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on first appeal

CIT v. Union Tyres
240 ITR 556 · 1999 · High Court
135
citing judgments

The first appellate authority, the Commissioner (Appeals), cannot enhance an assessment by considering a new scope or source of income that was not part of the original assessment proceedings. Its power to enhance under Section 251(1)(a) is restricted to what was originally assessed.

Sanjay Sawhney v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax
116 Taxmann.com 701 · 2020 · High Court
87
citing judgments

Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules allows a respondent to defend a favourable order of the CIT(A) by raising grounds decided against them, even without filing an appeal or cross-objection. Such issues can be raised orally and for the first time before the Tribunal.

Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
156 ITR 54 · 1985 · High Court
59
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit and adjudicate a new legal ground for the first time, even if not raised in earlier appellate proceedings, provided its omission was neither willful nor unreasonable.

Kiran Singh & Ors. v. Chaman Paswan & Ors.
1 SCR 117 · 1955 · Supreme Court
55
citing judgments

A decree or proceeding initiated by an authority without jurisdiction is a nullity, void ab initio, and its invalidity can be raised at any stage, including in collateral proceedings or for the first time on appeal, as a defect of jurisdiction cannot be cured even by consent.

CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar
74 ITR 41 · 1969 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

The first appellate authority cannot dismiss an appeal for default without disposing of the grounds on merits. Dismissal without going into the merits is not justified.

Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
408 ITR 500 · 2018 · High Court
32
citing judgments

A tribunal can exercise its discretion to admit an additional ground of appeal, even if raised for the first time, provided it considers the facts and circumstances of the case.

CIT v. Geo Industries and Insecticides (1) Pvt Ltd.
96 TTJ 211 · 2005 · ITAT
30
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) can adjudicate a fresh claim raised for the first time before it, provided it is permissible under the law.

Ramco Cements Ltd. v. DCIT
373 ITR 146 · 2015 · High Court
28
citing judgments

An assessee can make a claim of deduction for the first time before the appellate authorities.

Judgments citing first appeal

Bhagirath Pakhria, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 570/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

stock in trade. Finally, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.94.11 Lacs as undisclosed income / money u/s 69A and framed the assessment. 3. During first appeal, the assessee disputed the valuation and stated that Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Sec.50C without reference to valuation officer. However

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 569/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

stock in trade. Finally, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.94.11 Lacs as undisclosed income / money u/s 69A and framed the assessment. 3. During first appeal, the assessee disputed the valuation and stated that Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Sec.50C without reference to valuation officer. However

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 568/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

stock in trade. Finally, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.94.11 Lacs as undisclosed income / money u/s 69A and framed the assessment. 3. During first appeal, the assessee disputed the valuation and stated that Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Sec.50C without reference to valuation officer. However

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 567/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

stock in trade. Finally, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.94.11 Lacs as undisclosed income / money u/s 69A and framed the assessment. 3. During first appeal, the assessee disputed the valuation and stated that Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Sec.50C without reference to valuation officer. However

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 565/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

stock in trade. Finally, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.94.11 Lacs as undisclosed income / money u/s 69A and framed the assessment. 3. During first appeal, the assessee disputed the valuation and stated that Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Sec.50C without reference to valuation officer. However

ACIT 1, Gwalior vs. Pankaj Advertising Pvt Ltd, Gwalior

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 29/AGR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.28/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.29/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit, Circle-1, M/S. Pankaj Advertising Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Gwalior. Parakh Home, Bachchraj Ka Bada, Vs. Sarafa Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-2597-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Mahesh Agarwal, Ca – Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 & 2013-14 Arise Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gwalior [Cit(A)] On 26- 11-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 28-03-2013. Having Heard Rival Submissions, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under. 2. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Observed That There Was Difference In Sundry Creditor Balances For Rs.232.04 Lacs Which Is Tabulated On Page No.4 Of The Assessment Order. The Same Was Added To The Income

For Appellant: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Agarwal, CA – Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

order. The same was added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 for want of any satisfactory response from the assessee. 3. During first appeal, the assessee’s submissions were subjected to remand proceedings. The assessee’s further submissions reconciling the balances / rejoinder were subjected to second remand proceedings ... with. We order so. The appeal stand dismissed. 5. In AY 2013-14, Ld. AO made similar addition for difference in sundry creditors. During first appeal, the assessee successfully reconciled substantial differences. The adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) is on same lines. Therefore, facts being pari-materia the same, taking

ACIT Circle-1, Gwalior vs. Pankaj Advertising Pvt Ltd, Gwalior

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 28/AGR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.28/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.29/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit, Circle-1, M/S. Pankaj Advertising Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Gwalior. Parakh Home, Bachchraj Ka Bada, Vs. Sarafa Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-2597-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Mahesh Agarwal, Ca – Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 & 2013-14 Arise Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gwalior [Cit(A)] On 26- 11-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 28-03-2013. Having Heard Rival Submissions, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under. 2. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Observed That There Was Difference In Sundry Creditor Balances For Rs.232.04 Lacs Which Is Tabulated On Page No.4 Of The Assessment Order. The Same Was Added To The Income

For Appellant: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Agarwal, CA – Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

order. The same was added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 for want of any satisfactory response from the assessee. 3. During first appeal, the assessee’s submissions were subjected to remand proceedings. The assessee’s further submissions reconciling the balances / rejoinder were subjected to second remand proceedings ... with. We order so. The appeal stand dismissed. 5. In AY 2013-14, Ld. AO made similar addition for difference in sundry creditors. During first appeal, the assessee successfully reconciled substantial differences. The adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) is on same lines. Therefore, facts being pari-materia the same, taking

ACIT 2(1)(1), Agra vs. Madhukar Kapur, Agra

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 429/AGR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 429/Agr/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 ) Acit- 2(1)(1) बनाम/ Shri Madhukar Kapoor Agra. 64, Surya Nagar, Agra. Vs. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acnpk-8849-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Agra [Cit(A)] On 26-03-2015 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 28-02- 2014. The Sole Grievance Of The Revenue Is Qua Grant Of Deduction U/S 54 / 54F. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Adjudicated As Under. 2. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Assessed Capital Gains On Sale Of Certain House Property For Rs.454.98 Lacs Which Was Not Shown By The Assessee In The Return Of Income. The Assessee Sold His 2/3Rd Share Of Land Situated At 5/161, Saunth Ki Mandi, Agra To M/S Mahim Patran Pvt. Ltd. (Mppl) In Which The Assessee Acted As A Director. The Total

For Appellant: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53ASection 54Section 54F

possession was not parted with. However, Ld. AO assessed capital gains of Rs.454.98 Lacs and framed the assessment. 3. The assessee’s submissions during first appeal were subjected to remand proceedings vide AO’ remand report dated 19-09-2014. The assessee sought deduction u/s 54 and filed supporting evidences which

Sh. Sridhar Pandey, Auraiya vs. A.C.I.T.-2, Agra

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 492/AGR/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.492/Agr/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Shri Sridhar Pandey Acit-2, बनाम/ S/O Late Sh. Babu Ram Pandey Agra Vs. Muradganj, Distt. Auriya (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aljpp-4364-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2003-04 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Agra [Cit(A)] On 31-03-2012 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 153A Of The Act On 06-12-2006. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Accordingly, The Appeal Was Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Dismissal Of The Appeal. 2. From Case Records, It Could Be Ascertained That The Assessee Was Subjected To Search U/S 132 On 03-03-2005 & Notice U/S 153A Was Issued On 24-01-2006. The Assessee Initially Filed Return Of Income On 30- 03-2005 I.E., Before Issuance Of Notice U/S 153A. In Response To Notice U/S 153A, The Assessee Offered The Same Income. The Ld. Ao, After Rejecting

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

name of Shri Alok Tiwari. There was no mention of any dates or the name of the assessee. We find that during first appeal, the assessee amply demonstrated this fact which is evident from assessee’s submissions as extracted at para 8.3 of the impugned order

Brijwasi Real Estate, Mathura vs. Income Tax Officer 1(3)(1), Mathura

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 74/AGR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.74/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Brijwasi Real Estate Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 40/2-A, Sarswati Bhawan, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura. Vs. Prayag Ghat, Mathura (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfb6619C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. M.M. Agarwal, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 24-01-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 30-12-2018. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. From The Case Records, It Emerges That The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 On 31-03-2018 Pursuant To Receipt Of Certain Information From Investigation Wing. It Was Alleged That Income Of Rs.544.47 Lacs Escaped Assessment. The Same Represent Investment In Two Immoveable Properties By The Firm. The Assessee Stated That The Properties Were Purchased Out Of Partners’ Capital. The Ld.

For Appellant: Sh. M.M. Agarwal, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Lacs with respect to unsecured loans on the allegation that the nature and source thereof could not be proved by the assessee. 3. During first appeal, the assessee stated that original return of income was filed furnishing full financial statements and the same was proceeded u/s 143(1). During assessment

Naseem Ishrat, Jhansi vs. ITO.Ward 2(3)(5), Jhansi, Up

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 69/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.69/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Naseem Ishrat Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 81, Sangam Vihar Colony, Ward 2(3)(5), Jhansi. Vs. Sipri Bazar, Jhansi (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpi-5615-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 30-11-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act On 30-05-2023. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Under The Head Capital Gains & Determined Total Income At Rs.103.50 Lacs. The Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Admit First Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 77 Days. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 24 Days In The Appeal. The Ld. Ar Has Prayed For Adjudication Of The Appeal On Merits Which Has Been Opposed By Ld. Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR
Section 147

order, Ld. AO made addition under the head capital gains and determined total income at Rs.103.50 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit first appeal for want of condonation of delay of 77 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The registry has noted delay

Shree Badshah Yadav Charitable Trust, Mainpuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(5), Mainpuri

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 573/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.573/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) Shree Badshah Yadav Income-Tax Officer, Charitable Trust Ward 4(2)(5), Mainpuri. बनाम/ Campus S.K. Scientific Public Vs. Inter College Karhal, Mainpuri(Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaots-3631-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 15-11-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 144 Of The Act On 28-10-2019. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Of Cash Deposit For Rs.37 Lacs For Want Of Any Satisfactory Explanation From The Assessee. The Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Admit The Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 83 Days. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Ld. Ar Has Stated That The Assessee Is In A Position To Substantiate Its Case On Merits & Accordingly, Prayed For Another

For Appellant: Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR
Section 144

assessee to substantiate its case on merits before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the delay in first appeal stand condoned. The appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing

Surendra Kumar Sharma, Gwalior vs. Commissioner, Delhi

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 572/AGR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.572/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) बनाम/ Sh. Surendra Kumar Sharma Income-Tax Officer, 354, Tansen Nagar, Gwalior. Ward 3(1), Gwalior. Vs. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Armps-4378-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 28-04-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act On 20-11-2018. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Of Cash Deposit For Rs.17.75 Lacs For Want Of Any Satisfactory Explanation From The Assessee. The Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Admit The Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 74 Days. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Ld. Ar Has Stated That The Assessee Is In A Position To Substantiate Its Case On Merits & Accordingly, Prayed For Another Opportunity Of Hearing Before Lower Authorities Which Has Been Opposed By Ld. Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147

assessee to substantiate its case on merits before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the delay in first appeal stand condoned. The appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing