← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1153/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1152/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1151/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1150/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1149/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1148/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1146/AHD/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2021-2022
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC (1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1145/AHD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

ITA 1144/AHD/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2019-2020
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1142/AHD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1141/AHD/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2016-2017
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahemedabad

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

ITA 1140/AHD/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1139/AHD/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1138 To 1146/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2021-22) बनाम/ Prakash Misrimal Deputy Commissioner Of Sanghvi Income-Tax Vs. 17, Rajmugat Soc. Central Circle-1(1), Naranpura Char Rasta, Ahmedabad Naranpura, Ahmedabad 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps7266A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition to 20% of the total credits

Prakash Misrimal Sanghvi, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT CC 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1138/AHD/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2013-2014
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Accordingly, the total credit of Rs.20,82,37,741/- as appearing in this ledger account was treated as income of the assessee. 55. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the Maalkhaate ledger also had debit entries and, therefore, he reduced the addition ... interest of Rs.16,39,02,055/- as income of the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting and accordingly made the addition. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by holding that the entries for accrued interest were only notional entries and that no income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune vs. Advik Hi-Tech Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1330/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

complied with all the conditions for obtaining Form 3CL from DSIR but the same was not issued by DSIR even till the completion of first appeal proceedings. Ld. AR submitted before us that now Form 3CL has been received by the assessee and the same is being produced before ... Rs.13,46,18,011/- but since the assessee could not produce Form 3CL before the Assessing Officer, the above deduction was disallowed. Even in first appeal, Form 3CL was not furnished by the assessee, therefore, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the disallowance of Rs.13,46,18,011/-. We find

Advik Hi Tech Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Dy.Comm.of Income Tax, Circle 8, Pune, Akurdi Pune

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1158/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1158/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1330/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Vs. Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Shah & Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

complied with all the conditions for obtaining Form 3CL from DSIR but the same was not issued by DSIR even till the completion of first appeal proceedings. Ld. AR submitted before us that now Form 3CL has been received by the assessee and the same is being produced before ... assessee could not produce Form 3CL before the Assessing 13 ITA No.1158/PUN/2023 [A] ITA No.1330/PUN/2023 [R] Officer, the above deduction was disallowed. Even in first appeal, Form 3CL was not furnished by the assessee, therefore, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the disallowance of Rs.13,46,18,011/-. We find

Bindya Ashok Dwara, Dubai, Uae vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4543/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2011-12 Mrs. Bindya Ashok Dwara, Commissioner Of Income Flat No.204, Building 9, Tax (Appeals), Foxhill 9, Motor City, Government Of India, Dubai – 124055 Vs. Ministry Of Finance, Pan: Aknpd9713A Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi – 110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Harman Sodhi, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 18 . 12 .2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Harman Sodhi, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

return of income. However, the Assessee on getting information about the passing of the assessment order and the making of addition, though preferred first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner with a delay of more than six years but did not file any appropriate application seeking such condonation of delay ... filing of the first appeal. The Assessee also filed new/additional evidences before the Ld. Commissioner but without filing appropriate application under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short “the Rules”). Therefore, the Ld. Commissioner was constrained not to condone the delay and not to entertain the additional

Build Tec Construction, Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle 1(1) Gurgaon, Gurgaon

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

ITA 4566/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151A

staff to look after its affairs. It is also natural that after closure of business, partners also did not pay full attention. In the first appeal there is a delay of only 342 day and the assessee would not gain anything by filing the appeal late. There is no mala

Manvendra Singh Gaur, Jhansi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Agra

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 49/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.49/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Manvendra Singh Gaur Acit, Central Circle बनाम/ D-86, Awas Vikas Agra Vs. Shivaji Nagar, Jhansi 284 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Apspg-7384-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav (Cit) – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17-02-2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav (CIT) – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

noted delay of 72 days which stand condoned. 2. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of Rs.5.90 Lacs which stood confirmed in first appeal for want of representation from the assessee. 3. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Chandigarh vs. Atma Ram Jewellers, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 206/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: This Tribunal. The Revenue Is Aggrieved By The Order Bearing No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059539557 (1) Dated 10.01.2024 Passed By Cit(A) Under Section 250 Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-18 & The Previous Year Period Is From 01.04.2016 To 31.03.2017. 2. Factual Matrix 2.1 During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Trading Jewellery. 2.2 That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 6Section 69A

which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Assessment order”. 2.6 The assessee being aggrieved by the ‘Impugned Assessment Order' preferred first appeal under Section 246A of the Act before ld. CIT(A) who by the impugned order has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee on substantial issue