← 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

Sadbhav Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 235/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsr. No. Appellant Respondent 1-7 It(Ss)A.No./ Asstt.Year 170 To 175 & 235/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 13 To 2018-19 Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedbad. Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. 8-14 183 To 189/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 14 To 2018-19 Pan : Aadcs 0852 Q Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By: Shri H. Phani Raju, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: The Above Cross-Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) 11, Ahmedabad All Dated 04.08.2021 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short) For The

For Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, अहमदाबाद न्यायपीठ 'A' अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1235/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1234 & 1235/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Gourishankar Education Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. Society, Panchganga Apartment, Opp. Axis Bank, Radhika Road, Satara- 415001. Pan : Aaatg6668A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 30.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1234/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 13(2)(a)Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 263

making the addition of Rs.3.30 crores thereby assessing total income at Rs.3.30 crores. The assessee preferred first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and being unsatisfied with the ex-parte order of Ld. CIT(A), second appeal was filed before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has set-aside the ex-parte

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1234/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1234 & 1235/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Gourishankar Education Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. Society, Panchganga Apartment, Opp. Axis Bank, Radhika Road, Satara- 415001. Pan : Aaatg6668A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 30.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1234/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 13(2)(a)Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 263

making the addition of Rs.3.30 crores thereby assessing total income at Rs.3.30 crores. The assessee preferred first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and being unsatisfied with the ex-parte order of Ld. CIT(A), second appeal was filed before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has set-aside the ex-parte

Mula Parisar Serva Seva Sangh, Sonai vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Nsk, Nashik

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

ITA 632/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.632/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mula Parisar Serva Seva Vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Sangh, Nashik. At Post- Sonal, Tal.- Newasa, Dist.- Ahmednagar- 414105. Pan : Aaatm7100K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mihir Bapat Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Coimbatore For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Allowing Credit For Tds Of Rs.1,18,77,593/- As Claimed In The Return Of Income & As Per 26As Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-. 2) Interest U/S 244A On Refund – Not Grated By A.O. 3) Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Providing Any Reasons In Not Allowing Tds Claim Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-.

For Appellant: Shri Mihir BapatFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 244A

which was claimed by the assessee as refund. 4. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore dismissed the first appeal filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. AR appearing from

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Sanguine Media Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 480/CHNY/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1594/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Sanguine Media Limited Ito बनाम/ Plot No.135A, 1St Floor, Non-Corporate Ward-20(5) Chandran Nagar Main Road, Chennai Vs. Chrompet, Chennai-600 044. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-2217-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.480/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito M/S. Sanguine Media Limited बनाम/ Plot No.135A, 1St Floor, Non-Corporate Ward-10(6) Chennai Chandran Nagar Main Road, Vs. Chrompet, Chennai-600 044. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-2217-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Neeraj Mangla (Ca) (Virtual)- Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Mangla (CA) (Virtual)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

made certain addition u/s 68 for Rs.105 Crores and withdrew excess claim of depreciation for Rs.456.21 Lacs as made by the assessee. The first appeal against the quantum addition was dismissed. The assessee carried the issue of addition u/s 68 before Tribunal vide ITA No.882/Chny/2020 order dated 31.01.2023 which ... income. The case laws as relied upon by the assessee were held to be distinguishable. It was also noted by Ld. AO that the first appeal on quantum addition was dismissed by first appellate authority. The assessee filed return with due application of mind and the form of verification

Subban Sivakumar, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Ncc-2, Coimbatore

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2483/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2483/Chny/2024 (िनधा:रणवष: / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Subban Sivakumar Acit बनाम/ #51/5-6, 4Th Street, Muthukumar Non Corporate Circle-2 Vs. Rathinapuri, Coimbatore-641 027. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Eicps-4239-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala (Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. C. Vatchala (CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 44ASection 69A

already offered by the assessee, the undisclosed profit was estimated at Rs.276.61 Lacs which was also added as undisclosed profits. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal against the same. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 During appellate proceedings, the assessee, inter-alia, submitted that it has given short term loans to various people

Sanguine Media Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1594/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1594/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Sanguine Media Limited Ito बनाम/ Plot No.135A, 1St Floor, Non-Corporate Ward-20(5) Chandran Nagar Main Road, Chennai Vs. Chrompet, Chennai-600 044. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-2217-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.480/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito M/S. Sanguine Media Limited बनाम/ Plot No.135A, 1St Floor, Non-Corporate Ward-10(6) Chennai Chandran Nagar Main Road, Vs. Chrompet, Chennai-600 044. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-2217-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Neeraj Mangla (Ca) (Virtual)- Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Mangla (CA) (Virtual)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

made certain addition u/s 68 for Rs.105 Crores and withdrew excess claim of depreciation for Rs.456.21 Lacs as made by the assessee. The first appeal against the quantum addition was dismissed. The assessee carried the issue of addition u/s 68 before Tribunal vide ITA No.882/Chny/2020 order dated 31.01.2023 which ... income. The case laws as relied upon by the assessee were held to be distinguishable. It was also noted by Ld. AO that the first appeal on quantum addition was dismissed by first appellate authority. The assessee filed return with due application of mind and the form of verification