“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

citing judgments

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

Judgments citing first appeal

Jasudben Navinchandra Modi, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(2) Present Jurisdiction the ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 395/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Ahmedabad Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 05.04.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69

income. The assessment was framed by the AO ex-parte u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the 1961 Act,dated 10.12.2019. 3. Aggrieved, assessee filed first appeal with learned CIT(A). who issued notice of hearing , as under:- Hearing Notice Remarks i) Notice dated 18-03-2021 No compliance 4 I.T.A

Applabs Technologies Pvt Ltd (Now Merged With Computer Science Corporation Pvt Ltd ), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 854/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

1805/Hyd/2017 and 854/Hyd/2019 before the Assessing Officer. They have received the order and hence the issue is not being pressed before the first Appeal. In this light, the grounds are dismissed.” 4.2. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee had raised three issues which are related

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Applabs Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Now Merged With M/S Computer Science India Pvt. Ltd.), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 1805/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

Computer Sciences Corporation India Private Limited (Previously Known As Applabs Technologies Private Limited), Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 1793/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

M/S. Chitradurga Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Davangere

ITA 1018/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 12ASection 40

Page 7 of 18 aside. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay filed in the High Court would stand rejected and the miscellaneous first appeal shall stand dismissed as barred by time. No costs." Once the concerned authority applies its mind and declines to condone the delay in filing

Jai Krishan Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 36(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1241/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2017-18

For Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

additions of Rs.38,18,000/- towards unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Act. The assessee has further challenged the summary disposal of first appeal by the CIT(A) on account of non prosecution. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, none attended for the assessee. Accordingly

Virender Kumar, Greater Noida vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(5), Noida

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

ITA 1226/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2012-13

For Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

assessee has challenged the 2. additions of Rs.36,38,250/- made by the AO. The assessee has further challenged the summary disposal of first appeal by the CIT(A) on account of non prosecution. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, none attended for the assessee. Accordingly, the matter

Neelam Sachin Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 768/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 2

cash credit of Rs. 13,96,398/- as the credit entries appearing in the Axis Bank on being remained unexplained. 4. Aggrieved , assessee filed first appeal before ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte in-limine, without discussing the issues on merit , by holding

Neelam Sachin Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 767/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 2

Neha Singh, Lucknow vs. ITO-3(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 23/LKW/2024[217-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69D

taking up indiscrete investigation / verification into the case, the LJAO has not found anything adverse among the claims made by this appellant in the First Appeal as well as written submissions made during the course of hearing of First Appeal. 12. Because the CIT(A) has nowhere discussed about ... admissibility or otherwise of the evidence and submissions made by the appellant in the First Appeal as well as the written submissions made by the appellant during the course of hearing of First Appeal. The CIT(A) in the impugned order has nowhere disclosed the nature and details of additional

Shailesh K Patel-HUF, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 288/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 288/Ahd/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shailesh K. Patel Huf The Income Tax Officer बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Ward – 3(3)(5), Vs. Advocate Ahmedabad 512, Time Square – I, Op. Ram Baug Bungalow, Thaltej Shilaj Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aalhs9548E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Ketan Shah & Shri Aman Shah, अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : A.Rs. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. Dr 04/06/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 24.01.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 68

transactions by creating a façade of legitimate transactions. ITA No. 288/Ahd/2019 (Shailesh K Patel – HUF vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 6 – 6. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition as made by the AO. He passed a detailed order and apart from the decisions as quoted

Shivdeeep Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 484/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 50C

Rs.75,94,850/- for stamp duty purposes as against the actual sale consideration of Rs.60,00,000/-. The appellant/assessee did not succeed in first appeal. Therefore, he filed this appeal before the Tribunal. 2 4. On legal issue, the Ld. Counsel, placing emphasis on the copy of the reasons recorded

Vinod Kumar Rana, Vijay Nagar Ghaziabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1176/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

violation of principles of natural justice. The adverse view was taken against the assessee apparently without giving opportunity. 4. The CIT(A) in the First Appeal has proceeded ex-parte due to non-compliance of the notices as alleged. To address the non- compliance, the ld. counsel referred

Subodh Kumar Choudhary, Delhi vs. ADIT CPC, Delhi

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

ITA 3293/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

were carried out the CPC- Bangluru 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

Shuaib Ahmad, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 57(3), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3212/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

confronting the same and in using the same adversely without providing the reasonable opportunity of defending, which inaction of the CIT(A) makes the first appeal proceedings and consequential order as null and void. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provision

Madhavi Ponugoti, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 471/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar, DR

Section 69A

deposits in the account of the assessee during demonetization period, holding that the assessee did not appear and explain these deposits. In the first appeal, the assessee had taken the plea that such deposits represent the repayment of the gold loan obtained by the assessee on earlier occasions. Learned

Abnm Restaurant Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 286/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.286/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 M/S Abnm Restaurant Pvt. Ltd.………....................…...……………....Appellant C/O M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700072. [Pan:Aaeca2448M] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi……….…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 13, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Invited Our Attention To The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Submit That The Same Was An Ex Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A). Further, That The First Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Dismissed By The Cit(A) Being Barred By Limitation By 60 Days. The Ld. Counsel Has Submitted That The Non-Compliance Before The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Intentional. The Representative Of The Assessee Namely Shri Samdarshi, Chartered Accountant, Could Not Appear Before The Cit(A) Due To His Personal Compulsions & Therefore, The Matter Before The Cit(A) Remained Unattended. Even, He Could Not Explain The Delay Of 60 Days In Filing Of

Section 147Section 250

submit that the same was an ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Further, that the first appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the CIT(A) being barred by limitation by 60 days. The ld. counsel has submitted that the non-compliance before

Rahul Ramesh Shelar, Thane vs. ACIT Circle-2, Kalyan

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

ITA 459/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Rahul Ramesh Shelar Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Pitru Chhaya Sadan, Income Tax, Circle 2 Near Railway Station, Ward No.6, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza Vangani West, Thane, Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada Maharashtra – 421503 Kalyan (W), Mumbai - 421301 Pan : Asbps3128C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44A

abeyance until the said issue is 5 Rahul Ramesh Shelar, AY 2013-14 settled with the department. Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the first appeal as infructuous by resorting to the filing of Form Nos. 1 and 2 and issuance of Form No. 3 as intimated by the assessee through

DCIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Suman Minda, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1730/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 69B

jewellery, in aggregate, inventoried during the search) had been transferred/sold out. Therefore, he taxed the capital gains arisen on such transfer/sale of jewellery. In first appeal, the respondent/assessee succeeded. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed this appeal. 2 3. At the outset, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the fact that

Techman Buildwell Private Lmited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-25(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed with the consequences following as per the

ITA 737/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Gs Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Arta Trana Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

commission to Rajesh Chandra, it was observed that this ground has not been pressed by the assessee at the time of hearing in the first appeal. 11. Now, with regard to the first ground of appeal in AY 2012-13, it comes up that there are two additions