first appeal — 5,395 case laws

Mr Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1219/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 1218/Del/2025 (A.Y 2019-20) Mr.Vikas Verma Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 101, 1St Floor, Laxmi Income Tax, Tower-Ii,Saraswati Vihar, Central Circle-30 New Delhi-110034 Delhi Pan: Aagpv8856R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. Krishna, Adv, Sh. Harshit Chauhan, Adv Revenue By Sh. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 153C

justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the first Appeals afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate and cooperate

Mr.Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1218/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 1218/Del/2025 (A.Y 2019-20) Mr.Vikas Verma Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 101, 1St Floor, Laxmi Income Tax, Tower-Ii,Saraswati Vihar, Central Circle-30 New Delhi-110034 Delhi Pan: Aagpv8856R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. Krishna, Adv, Sh. Harshit Chauhan, Adv Revenue By Sh. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 153C

justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the first Appeals afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate and cooperate

Mr. Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 1218/Del/2025 (A.Y 2019-20) Mr.Vikas Verma Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 101, 1St Floor, Laxmi Income Tax, Tower-Ii,Saraswati Vihar, Central Circle-30 New Delhi-110034 Delhi Pan: Aagpv8856R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. Krishna, Adv, Sh. Harshit Chauhan, Adv Revenue By Sh. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 153C

justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the first Appeals afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate and cooperate

S G Joshi (HUF), Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1059/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishras. G. Joshi (Huf) Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-4/33, Safdarjung Enclave, Circle 29(1) New Delhi-110029 New Delhi Pan: Aaihs9281F

Section 147Section 249(4)(b)

hereby set aside and we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the first Appeal on its merit. Needless to say, the Assessee shall be provided with opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 3 S. G. Joshi

Om Charitable Chikitsa Samiti, Gwalior vs. CIT Appeals, Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 10(23)(C)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 250

return filed electronically. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) who approved the assessment order and dismissed assessee’s first appeal. 4. The assessee has filed this appeal on the following grounds : “1. On the facts and circumstance of the case the learned

Amraram Gomaji Chowdhary, Navelim vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Margao

ITA 117/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 117/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Amraram Gomaji Chowdhary 457/C, Aquem Baixo, Firgulem, Navelim, Goa-403707. Pan : Aqjpc0124C . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pradeep Kulkarni [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Manju Thakur [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 26/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Appellant Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074431239(1) Dt. 12/03/2025 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 29/02/2024 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt Centre [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Pradeep Kulkarni [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Manju Thakur [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 69A

first appellate authority, the assessee filed present appeal u/s 253(1) of the Act with a substantive ground alleging the balance addition sustained in first appeal is without merits and devoid of facts. 4. We have heard the rival parties and subject to rule 18 of ITAT- Rules 1963 perused ... reasons, the initial cash deposit made on 19/09/2017 by the appellant was treated as remained unexplained and thus sustained by the Ld. NFAC in first appeal. ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 6 Amraram Gomaji Chowdhary Vs ITO ITA Nos.117/PAN/2025 AY: 2018-19 7. To vacate the remaining addition sustained

Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Sakariya, Rajkot vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 318/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.318/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Sakariya The Pr.Commissioner Of बनाम At Khajuri Gundala Income Tax-1, Rajkot. Post Station: Vavdi Vs. Amarnagar, Khajuri Gundala. Pan : Aslps 7027 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, ld.CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 263

Sakariya Vs. Pr.CIT 10 In this regard, I am enclosing herewith the copies of order of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat bearing first appeal No.709 of 2015, the Principal Senior Civil Judge at Gondal LAR.78/2004 at Annexure-E. Further, I rely on the decision of the ITAT

Pinkal Sureshkumar Kothari, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1303/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1303/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ Pinkal Sureshkumar Income Tax Officer Kothari Ward-5(2)(1), Vs. 4, Nemrajul Flat, Ahmedabad Navavikas Gruh Road, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat – 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amlpk3944L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Parth Mehta, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parth Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250Section 250(2)

Appellant had submitted documentary evidence explaining the sources of funds utilised for the said purchase 3. The Appellant had preferred his first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 10.07.2019 and duly filed submissions in support of his grounds of appeal on 17.10.2019 However, the matter remained pending without adjudication

Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Delhi

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 1213/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 271A

days and 239 days respectively in filing the Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in latches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal. 5. We have heard the Department's Representative and perused ... Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 253 days and 239 days respectively in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction

Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Delhi

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 1212/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 271A

days and 239 days respectively in filing the Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in latches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal. 5. We have heard the Department's Representative and perused ... Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 253 days and 239 days respectively in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction

Shri Rampurush Mandir Society, Cuncolim vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax - CPC, Bangalore

ITA 76/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji26 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 75 & 76/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 & 2022-23 Shri Rampurush Mandir Society Veroda, Cuncolim, Salcete, Goa-403703. Pan : Aadas9268E . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Narcinva Lotlikar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 25/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Twin Appeals Of The Appellant Assessee Impugns Separate Din & Orders Both Dt. 10/03/2025 Passed By The Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals(2), Kolkata [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Emanated Out Of Respective Summary Assessment Dt. 23/09/2022 & 16/03/2023 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt Centre [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Years 2021- 22 & 2022-23 [‘Ays’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Narcinva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 167BSection 2Section 246ASection 250

against rates applicable to ‘Individual’ the assessee filed separate appeals u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A). Being unsuccessful in first appeal, the assessee came in present twin appeals denying to be taxed at MMR & maximum surcharge with following common grounds; ITAT-Panaji Page

Shri Rampurush Mandir Society, Cuncolim vs. Assistant Director, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 75/PAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji26 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 75 & 76/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 & 2022-23 Shri Rampurush Mandir Society Veroda, Cuncolim, Salcete, Goa-403703. Pan : Aadas9268E . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Narcinva Lotlikar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 25/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Twin Appeals Of The Appellant Assessee Impugns Separate Din & Orders Both Dt. 10/03/2025 Passed By The Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals(2), Kolkata [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Emanated Out Of Respective Summary Assessment Dt. 23/09/2022 & 16/03/2023 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt Centre [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Years 2021- 22 & 2022-23 [‘Ays’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Narcinva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 167BSection 2Section 246ASection 250

against rates applicable to ‘Individual’ the assessee filed separate appeals u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A). Being unsuccessful in first appeal, the assessee came in present twin appeals denying to be taxed at MMR & maximum surcharge with following common grounds; ITAT-Panaji Page

Mr. Agnelo Socorro Joaquim Viegas, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(5), Panaji

ITA 69/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji26 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 069/Pan/2025 & Sa 06/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Agnelo Socorro Joaquim Viegas H. No. 373, Galliwaddo, Taleigao, Caranzalem, Goa-403002. Pan : Akapv9049C . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Vinesh Pikale [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Sanket Deshmukh[‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1073026397(1) Dt. 07/02/2025 Passed By Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals(2), Ahmedabad [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Sprung Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 27/12/2018 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act By The Income

For Appellant: Mr Vinesh Pikale [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Sanket Deshmukh[‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 44ASection 5ASection 69A

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act while completing the assessment in the hands of the appellant and such action was countenanced in first appeal by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforestated action of treating entire cash deposits as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act since confirmed

Dharmendra Kumar, Khandwa vs. ITO, Khandwa

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 521/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 44A

Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.08.2025 smez1/O RDER Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 31.10.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated ... period 12.10.2022 to 13.03.2023 as mentioned in Para 2 of AO’s order. Thereafter, Ld. AR carried us to the impugned order of first-appeal passed by CIT(A) to show that the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal on the footing of delayed filing by 122 days. Page

Shri Shivbachan Sewa Santhan, Ghazipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 125/LKW/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Aug 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 253(3)Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

These two appeals have been filed by the same assessee against the separate orders of learned CIT (Exemptions), Lucknow each dated 31/01/2024. The first appeal relates to the registration u/s 12AB of the Act and the other appeal relates to the approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act. Since both

Shri Shivbachan Sewa Santhan, Ghazipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 124/LKW/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Aug 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 253(3)Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

These two appeals have been filed by the same assessee against the separate orders of learned CIT (Exemptions), Lucknow each dated 31/01/2024. The first appeal relates to the registration u/s 12AB of the Act and the other appeal relates to the approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act. Since both

Laxmichand Kapurji Padhiyar, Deesa vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Palanpur

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

ITA 1302/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1302/Ahd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Pandya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 40

hold, is not in consonance with law. The provisions of Section 250 of the Act which provides the procedure in first appeal, at sub-section (6), clearly states that the order of Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal should be in writing and stating the points for determination, the decision

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4384/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

appeals had by the assessee on 23.02.2017 and thereafter the two appeals had been filed by the assessee. by the assessee. The first appeal was on 27.04.2017 The first appeal was on 27.04.2017 Arti Shailen Topiwala 13 ITA No TA No. 4383 and 4384/MUM/2025 which was filed electronically which

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4383/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

appeals had by the assessee on 23.02.2017 and thereafter the two appeals had been filed by the assessee. by the assessee. The first appeal was on 27.04.2017 The first appeal was on 27.04.2017 Arti Shailen Topiwala 13 ITA No TA No. 4383 and 4384/MUM/2025 which was filed electronically which

Allknown Marketers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2394/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rishi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 68

credit u/s.68 of the Act to make the addition. Assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A), before whom also no compliances were made. The first appeal was dismissed for non- prosecution. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the above

“first appeal”

Leading authorities on first appeal

Judgments citing first appeal

Mr Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

Mr.Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

Mr. Vikas Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

S G Joshi (HUF), Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Delhi

Om Charitable Chikitsa Samiti, Gwalior vs. CIT Appeals, Delhi

Amraram Gomaji Chowdhary, Navelim vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Margao

Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Sakariya, Rajkot vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

Pinkal Sureshkumar Kothari, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Delhi

Adhishwar Nivesh Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Delhi

Shri Rampurush Mandir Society, Cuncolim vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax - CPC, Bangalore

Shri Rampurush Mandir Society, Cuncolim vs. Assistant Director, CPC, Bangalore

Mr. Agnelo Socorro Joaquim Viegas, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(5), Panaji

Dharmendra Kumar, Khandwa vs. ITO, Khandwa

Shri Shivbachan Sewa Santhan, Ghazipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Lucknow

Shri Shivbachan Sewa Santhan, Ghazipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Lucknow

Laxmichand Kapurji Padhiyar, Deesa vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Palanpur

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

Allknown Marketers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Mumbai