← 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

ACIT (Central)-2, Bhopal vs. Hariom Properties, Bhopal

ITA 295/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 43CSection 68

assessment-order u/s 143(3) after making certain additions and thereby determining total income at Rs. 7,40,78,891/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed first appeal before CIT(A) and succeded partly to a large extent. Now, the revenue has come in next appeal assailing the order of first-appeal ... were not filed. Finally, the AO concluded that the assessee had failed to satisfy the ingredients of section 69 and made addition. 6. During first-appeal, the CIT(A) reversed AO's action and deleted addition precisely accepting these reasons submitted by assessee: (i) All loans were taken through banking

Ajd Developers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Assistance Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7, Jaipur

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 536/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Against The Order Dated 26.12.2019 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short Act ] By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-J, Jaipur [ For Short Ao].

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh MantriFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43CSection 44A

appeal relates to the assessment year 2017-18. The said order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC arise because the assessee filed first appeal before ld. CIT(A) against the order dated 26.12.2019 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, [ for short Act ] by the Assistant Commissioner

Ascent Constructions Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 1(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3217/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 3217/Del/2023, (A.Y.2017-18)

Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

were carried out the CPC- Bengaluru and intimation was issued enhancing the assessed income in the captioned assessment years. The CIT(A) in the first appeal has sustained the adjustments towards belated deposits of employees' contribution to PF/ESIC in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme

Rajendra Rajan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 33(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 4385/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

total income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex-parte. 4. Assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition

Bhanupratap Santprasad Singh, Parbhani Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Hingoli, Parbhani, Maharashtra

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

ITA 251/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.251/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bhanupratap Santprasad Vs. Ito, Ward- Hingoli, Singh, Parbhani. Pandharkar Niwas, Dnayneshwar Nagar, Parbhani- 431401. Pan : Awgps7884J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Darshan R Gattani Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.12.2023 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For The Assessment Year 2018-19 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.30,46,456/- Made By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) On Account Of Disallowance U/S 43B For Non-Payment Of Service Tax, Even Though Neither The Tax Amount Was Received From The Customer Nor Was The Service Tax Amount Debited To Profit & Loss Account. Therefore, The Same May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan R GattaniFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

date mentioned u/s 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, 4. Aggrieved with the above adjustments/ disallowances made by the CPC, the assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru. After considering the reply of the 3 assessee and various case laws, the ld. Addl./JCIT

Akshya Infrastructure Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward 1, Puducherry

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

ITA 1372/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1372/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-2014) Akshya Infrastructure Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 57/2B, Sai Subhodhaya Apartment Ward 1, Ecr Road, Puducherry. Tiruvanmayur, Chennai 600 041. [Pan: Aahca 6944K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Dr. R. Mohan Reddy, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. R. Mohan Reddy, IRS, CIT
Section 144

detected only in the month of November, 2023 and thereafter, the appeal against the appellate order dated 25.03.2019 in rejecting the e-filed first appeal (date of filing 23.12.2016) was prepared and filed in the office of the counsel on record. The appellant, based on the professional advice, the said

Iei Shareholding Medical Benefit Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4408/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Motichand Gupta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 156BSection 250

professional advice on the correct legal position of law and upon realizing that the demand raised by the CPC is illegal, the Assessee preferred first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner but with a delay of 265 days. [ 3. The Ld. Commissioner though considered the application for delay filed

Ramesh Surendra Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-8(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4141/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Rutu Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunny Kachhwaha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

rental income and Rs.65,48,281/- on account of unexplained cash credit. 3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, chhekgende3d the aforesaid addition by filling first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner on 25.04.2014. As appears in para-no.3 of the impugned order, the appeal filed by the Assessee was taken into

Sunanda Umap, Pune vs. CIT (A), Ward 12(3), Pne-W-(67)(3), Pune

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

ITA 1467/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: None
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 234FSection 3Section 50CSection 54B

144B of the IT Act on a total income at Rs.22,27,982/-. Since the assessee remained absent, ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the first appeal vide order dated 15.05.2024. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. When the case was called ... requested to confirm the same. 6. We have heard ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. We find that the first appeal order was passed ex-parte i.e. in the absence of assessee. We find that ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has issued 3 hearing notices

Avnet Technology Hong Kong Limited, Hong Kong vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 1987/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1987/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2015-16) Avnet Technology Hong Kong Ltd., 22/F, Tower-2, Enterprises Square Five, 38, Wang Chiu Road, Kowloon Bay, Hong Kong, Sar- 999999 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aakca-1127-B बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central International Tax 1(1)(1), Civic Centre, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent E-2, Minto Road, New Delhi 110002

For Appellant: Shri Tapas Misra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ekta Jain, CIT(DR)
Section 5

belated by 274 days. The assessee had filed an Application for condonation before the CIT(A) giving reasons for delay in filing of the First Appeal. The CIT(A) taking a hyper technical view on the reasons furnished by the assessee explaining delay, dismiss appeal on the ground of limitation

Jaynt Vasudeo Aradhye, Solapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Solapur

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

ITA 683/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.683/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Jaynt Vasudeo Aradhye, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Solapur. Villa No.25, Indradhanu, Laxmi Peth, Vishnu Mill Compound, Solapur- 413001. Pan : Aappa8903M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chintaman Gadgil Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 : Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.02.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Coimbatore For The Assessment Year 2022-23 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “I. The Cpc Was Not Correct Both Factually & Legally In Not Considering The Claim Of Brought Forwarded Short Term Capital Loss Of Rs 27,78,028/-. 11. Section 143(1) As It Stands On The Statute Books As On Today, Does Not Permit Either Cpc Or The Ao To Make Such Adjustments As They Are Beyond The Scope Of The Said Section.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chintaman Gadgil
Section 10Section 10ASection 115BSection 143(1)Section 155BSection 16Section 23Section 24Section 32Section 32A

term capital loss of Rs.27,78,028/- was not allowed by the CPC while processing the return, without any valid reason. The assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore and furnished written submissions before him wherein it was submitted that the 3 short term capital ... this brought forward loss of Rs.27,78,028/-, which resulted in additional demand of income tax of Rs.9,96,750/-. In first appeal proceedings, ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by referring to section 115BAC(2)&(3) wherein it has been mentioned that

Askari Infotech Private Limited, Pune vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Pune

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

ITA 262/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Sathe
Section 143(1)Section 144

Appellant. While doing so he violated the Principles of Natural Justice by refusing the Appellant to be verbally heard in the First Appeal / matter on his hand. Ground No. 2: - The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition ... total income at Rs.3,40,38,176/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.9,62,584/-. 5. Then assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. After considering the reply of the assessee, ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed

Rajvidyalaya Educational Trust, Kuttalam vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Trichy

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2049/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2049/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Rajvidyalaya Educational Trust Ito बनाम/ 23, Uthira North Car Street, Exemptions Ward, Vs. Kuttalam-609 801. Trichy. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabtr-8546-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Girish Kumar (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Girish Kumar (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 69A

same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 3. Though the assessee has remained negligent and could not establish reasonable cause for filing of first appeal with a delay, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we condone the delay before Ld. CIT(A) subject to payment

Kalindee Estates Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

ITA 770/JPR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Oct 2024AY 2010-2011
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

Annexures totalling to 135 pages in support of grounds of appeal taken by it— View Response to Notice ID 100073543311 Proceeding Name PAN First Appeal Proceedings AABCA3399J Assessee Name KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED Financial Year 2009-10 Assessment Year 2010-11 Document reference ID Notice Section ITBA/NFAC/F/APL_1/2023-250 24/1060394681 ... RESPONSE SUBMITTED Remarks Hash * Value Of Remarks e-Proceedings Response Acknowledgement INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AABCA3399J KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED 2009-10 2010-11 First Appeal Proceedings 100073543311 250 [ITBA] Hearing Notice u/s 250of Income Tax Act 1961. 01-Feb-2024 12-Feb-2024 ITBA/NFAC/F/APL_1/2023-24/1060394681(1) MENT Sir/Madam, Please find enclosed

Mahesh T. Prasana, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Parwanoo

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 419/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D.Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 419/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, &For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl.CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 80I

considering the replies, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Parwanoo passed an Assessment order u/s 143(3) on 25.02.2015. 4. That I filed First Appeal for AY 2012-13 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 25.03.2015. 5. That I am a regular taxpayer and have always complied ... made under the penalty proceedings for AY20~T2-T3, it is captured that I am waiting for the decision of the CIT(A) under the first appeal proceedings. Hon'ble CIT(A) also disposed of the penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) on this basis. 11. Therefore, I was always

Prabodh Mohanlal Shah, Vadodara vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Intl. Taxation, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 331/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 288Section 292BSection 54

submitted a revised appeal memo duly signed by him and has prayed that delay, if any, be condoned. This may impliedly mean that the first appeal memo was not duly signed by the applicant. In such circumstance, when the appellate authority has considered the fact that when the revised appeal

Ags Developers Pvt Ltd, Jasola Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2185/DEL/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Ags Developers Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H.No.47, Pocket Ii, Ward -1(4), Near Appollo Hospital, Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi-110076. Pan-Aafca1795G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sandeep Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2024

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That impugned assessment order passed u/s 147/143 of 1961 Act (dated 23.03.2016) and further impugned first appeal order passed u/s 250 of 1961 Act (dated 14.03.2024) are both invalid and deserve to be quashed in toto because they are founded and based ... infer escapement of income, same could only be done if at all under special and specific provision of sec 153C of 1961 Act; therefore first appeal order dated 14.03.2024 is also invalid. Both order may please be quashed and set aside; 1.2 Impugned Assessment order dated 23.03.2016 passed u/s 147/143

Rejendra Ramjibhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Intl. Taxn., Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 138/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 234ASection 292B

submitted a revised appeal memo duly signed by him and has prayed that delay, if any, be condoned. This may impliedly mean that the first appeal memo was not duly signed by the applicant. In such circumstance, when the appellate authority has considered the fact that when the revised appeal

Ruhi Khalid Parwani, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(3) Pune, Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

ITA 1553/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1553/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ruhi Khalid Parwani 9, Meher House, Kahun Rd., Camp, Pune-411001 Pan : Aovpp5464Q . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Saurabh Patil [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 54

Patil at the outset submitted that, in response to hearing notice & in support of grounds of appeal in first appeal before Ld. NFAC, a full documentary evidences accompanying written submissions was uploaded online on 17/05/2024. Adverting to the copy of reply it is also averred that, it on record that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Ciecle-2, Coimbatore vs. V Sathyamoorthy Co, Erode

ITA 1547/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2024AY 2020-21
For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)- Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “सी” न्यायपीठ चेन्नई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय श्री एबी टी