← 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

Gurmeet Singh, Sas Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(4), Chandigarh, Mohali

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1211/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1211/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Gurmeet Singh Ito-Ward-6(4) H.No.71072C, Model Town Sec.68 बनाम/ Vs. Mundikharar, Chajjumajra Mohali Sec.126, Distt. Kharar Punjab 160062 Sas Nagar – 141 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Difps-4252-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla (Ca) (Virtual) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 14-11-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 25-11-2019 Making Addition Of Cash Deposit Of Rs.124.50

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla (CA) (Virtual) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 126Section 144Section 68

receive any hearing notices / assessment order, since these were sent at wrong address. The whole facts leading to delay in first appeal has been narrated in the affidavit. On these facts, Ld. AR sought adjudication of appeal on merits which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 3. After going ... though the affidavit of the assessee, we find that the assessee has established reasonable cause for late filing of first appeal. Therefore, we accept the prayer of Ld. AR and set aside the impugned order. The appeal is restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits with

Karnail Singh, Patiala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 4, Patiala

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1110/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1110/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Karnail Singh Ito-Ward-4 C/O Sandeep Goyal (Advocate) Patiala बनाम/ Vs. H. No. 1385, Sector 40-B, Punjab Chandigarh-160036. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Eybps-5925-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Peyush Pruthi (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27-03-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act On 06-09-2022. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 160 Days In The Appeal, The Condonation Of Which Has Been Sought By Ld. Ar.

For Appellant: Sh. Peyush Pruthi (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144

well as interest received on such compensation. The assessee failed to make any submissions during assessment proceedings. The position remained the same during first appeal which led to confirmation of assessment order against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR stated that the land

Farooq Ahmad Bhat, Anantnag vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Udhampur

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 204/ASR/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 203/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.204/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Farooq Ahmad Bhat Ito बनाम/ Dabrun Anantnag Ward Udhampur Vs. Jammu & Kashmir 192101 Jammu & Kashmir. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Cgapb-6834-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday (Ca) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2014-15 & 2015-16 Have Identical Facts. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 35 Days In The Appeals Which Stand Condoned. The Appeal For Ay 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 25-11-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment

For Appellant: Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday (CA) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 147Section 69A

basis u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 11-05-2023. The Ld. AO assessed bank deposits of Rs.347.84 Lacs u/s 69A. During first appeal, the assessee could not substantiate the deposits with cogent evidences and accordingly, the assessment was confirmed. Similar are the facts

Farooq Ahmad Bhat, Anantnag vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-, Udhampur

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 203/ASR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 203/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.204/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Farooq Ahmad Bhat Ito बनाम/ Dabrun Anantnag Ward Udhampur Vs. Jammu & Kashmir 192101 Jammu & Kashmir. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Cgapb-6834-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday (Ca) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2014-15 & 2015-16 Have Identical Facts. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 35 Days In The Appeals Which Stand Condoned. The Appeal For Ay 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 25-11-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment

For Appellant: Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday (CA) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 147Section 69A

basis u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 11-05-2023. The Ld. AO assessed bank deposits of Rs.347.84 Lacs u/s 69A. During first appeal, the assessee could not substantiate the deposits with cogent evidences and accordingly, the assessment was confirmed. Similar are the facts

Shmashan Sewa Samiti, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Amritsar

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 594/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 594/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shmashan Sewa Samiti Ito - Ward 1(1) बनाम/ Vs. Outside Chatiwind Gate, New Cr Building Amritsar-143001 Amritsar. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aasas-5377-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri Rohit Kapoor Advocate A/W Shri V.S. Aggarwal (Itp) –Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai [Cit(A)] Dated 29-08-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) Dated 12-03-2020. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 5 Days In The Appeal Which Stands Condoned. 2. It Emerges That The Assessee Is A Charitable Society. The Cpc Considered Entire Gross Receipts As The Income Of The Assessee Denying Deduction Claimed By The Assessee U/S 10(23C)(V). The Said

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

further appeal before us. 3. Considering the fact that the assessee is a charitable trust and its income would be exempt, the first appeal ought to have been admitted. Nevertheless, we direct Ld. CIT(A) to admit the appeal and adjudicate the grievance of the assessee on merits with

Rajdhani Transport Company Private Limited, Hoshiarpur, Punjab vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Hoshiarpur, Punjab

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

ITA 583/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 583/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S Rajdhani Transport Company Ito Private Limited Ward -3 बनाम/ Vs. 216-L, Model Town, Hoshiarpur. Hoshiarpur. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccr-5619-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Nikhil Goyal (Advocate) & Shri Ashok Goyal (Ca)–Ld.Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 05-09- 2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Act On 16-12-2019. The Ld. Ar Has Stated That The Assessment Order Does Not Survive In View Of The Fact

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal (Advocate) and ShriFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr
Section 143(3)Section 263

vide order dated 05-09-2024 which is impugned before us. The assessee failed to make any representation during the first appeal. In the meanwhile, revisionary order stood restored back by Tribunal in ITA No.150/Asr/2019 on 05-05-2022 as under: - 3. We observed the order of the Revenue authority