“ appeal before the tribunal ”

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court

2,040

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court

956

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

389 ITR 326 · 2016 · High Court

241

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar

An appellate authority can admit and adjudicate additional grounds of appeal if they are legal in nature or go to the root of the matter, even if not raised before lower authorities or filed belatedly.

1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported

225

392 ITR 244 · 2017 · High Court

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

Otters Club v. DIT

202

CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.

The Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days.

81 ITR 303 · 1971 · High Court

202

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT

Income received by an assessee for services rendered to an Indian company may not be taxable, particularly when the Revenue does not contest its non-taxability. This principle aligns with CBDT Circular No. 14 of 1955, which has been approved by the Supreme Court.

317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court

202

ITA 603/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Oct 2025

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Judgments citing appeal before the tribunal

Maharashtra Ex-Servicemen Corporation, Pune vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandramaharashtra Ex-Servicemen Cit(Exemption), Pune Corporation Ltd. Vs. 2Nd Floor, Raigad Building, Ghorpadi, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aadcm4072C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 15-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 2(15)

grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(E) the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide ITA No.129/PUN/2021 order dated 16.06.2021 restored the matter to the file of the CIT(E) with a direction to consider ... observing as under: 5 6 7 8 7. Aggrieved with such order of Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. The learned CIT Exemption erred in law and on facts in not granting registration u/s 12AA

Fab Welfare Foundation, Pune vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1552/PUN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. There is a delay of 55 days in filing of both the appeals before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed separate condonation applications along with affidavits explaining the reasons for such delay which is on account ... earlier, he refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act. 6. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(Exemption), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1] The learned CIT(E) erred in rejecting application filed by the appellant in Form 10AB for approval

Fab Welfare Foundation, Pune vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1551/PUN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Sridhar Maramreddy, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 504/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.504/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Sridhar Maramreddy, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Bqhpm4916K (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 07/10/2025 Hearing: घोर्णध की 09/10/2025 तधरीख/Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Inturi Rama Rao : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

vide the impugned order dismissed after considering the submissions made before him as not maintainable. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that one more opportunity be provided to present his case once again before

Ramalingaiah Karnati, Nalgonda vs. ITO Ward-1, Nalgonda

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

ITA 258/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.258/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Ramalingaiah Karnati, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1, Nalgonda. Nalgonda. Pan: Asypk1824C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 16.12.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income From The Business. The Return Of Income For The Asst. Year 2017-18 Was Filed On 15.12.2018 Disclosing Income Of Rs.4,13,570/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By Ito Vide Order Dated 18.12.2019 Passed Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Act At A Total Income Of Rs.22,27,070/-. While

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

evidences produced by the assessee. 4. At the outset, I find there is a delay of 4 days in filing of the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed ITA No.258/Hyd/2025 3 explanation. Having regard, the explanation offered for the delay, I am of the opinion that

Anandarao Kota, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 238/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.238/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Shri Anandarao Kota, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad. Ward 9(1), Pan: Cvopk0669Q Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is That The Assessee Is An Individual, No Regular Return Of Income U/S.139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Was Filed For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessing Officer Based On The Information That The Assessee Made Cash Deposits Of Rs.1,03,97,300/- In The Savings Bank Account Formed Opinion That The Income Had Escaped Assessment

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)

appeal on merits. 5. At the outset, I find that there is a delay of 140 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed an Affidavit seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the C.A. who is looking after the tax matter had not brought

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Paru Securities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai City

Accordingly we see no infirmity in the order of the FAA in deleting the addition made by the AO towards loss arising out of the M/s. PFL Infotech Ltd. The grounds raised by the revenue are thus dis...

ITA 885/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hemang Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. DR

Section 132(4)Section 250

addition after considering the detailed evidences including broker notes, Demat A/c statement, bank statement and capital gains computation, etc. The revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the FAA. 3. The ld. DR submitted that as per the search conducted and the statement recorded from

Kasiraj Rengappa, Tamilnadu vs. ITO, Ward Int. Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Kasiraj Rengappa Vs Ito, 6313, Clover Hill Drive, Ward-1(1)(1) San Jose Foreign, International Taxation, United States Of America Or Civic Centre, Minto Road, [Indian Address] - 3/226, New Delhi-110002. Navaneethkrishnapuram Sevlkulam, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu-627754. Pan-Brjpr2094A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri T.Vasudevan, Adv. (Through Vc) Respondent By Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.12.2021 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi-42 [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-42/10502/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 26.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is Nri & Earned Income From Interest Only During The Year & Filed His Return Of Income On 17.03.2018, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 85,320/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny By Issue Of Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Acton 24.09.2018. Thereafter Notices Were Issued U/S 142(1) In Response To Which Assessee Filed Reply From Time To Time. The Ao Observed That Assessee Deposited Cash In Sbn During Demonetization Period From 09.11.2016 To 30.12.2016 Into His Bank Account With State Bank Of India, Nro Account No.33350651335 Of Inr 22,50,000/-. After Considering The Submission Filed, Ao Passed The Order On 26.12.2019 U/S 143(3) Of The Act Wherein Total Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Inr 23,35,320/-.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

vide order dated 29.12.2021, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- [ 1. “The appellate order u/s.250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 29.12.2021 passed by the learned

Raghunath Mahato, Dhanbad vs. PCIT, Dhanbad

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

ITA 89/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayraghunath Mahato, Pr.C.I.T., Nawagarh, Harina Colony Road, Harina, Dhanbad. Vs. Jharkhand-826001. Pan No. Aetpm 0476 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 263

appeal raised by the assessee clearly shows that the assessee has challenged the principles of natural justice. The assessee has also filed an appeal before the Tribunal challenging this violation of the principles of natural justice. This being so, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that ... after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. It must be mentioned here that the assessee has been prompt in filing the appeal before the Tribunal but has been recalcitrant in representing his appeal. The same recalcitrant attitude has also been shown before the ld. Pr.CIT. However

Ajay Kumar, Saran, Bihar vs. ITO, Chapra

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

ITA 402/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 44ASection 69A

dated 25.01.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act, dated 17.12.2019. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that, the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that ... dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee could not file proper reply before

Madhur Laxman Gadikar, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 406/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalemadhur Laxman Gadikar, Kharbikar Mohalla, House No.426–B Ward No.27, Golibar Chowk ……………. Appellant Jaganath Gol, Nagpur-440018, Maharashtra, Pan – Avzpg3725G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(1), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri Abhishek Kumar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Kumar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

Madhur Laxman Gadikar ITA no.406/Nag./2025 maintainable. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned A.R. submitted that the learned CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that the assessee

Sree Anantalakshmi Textiles Pvt Ltd, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Eluru

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

ITA 402/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.402/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Sree Anantalakshmi Textiles (P) Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward-1 C/O. Nsl Textiles Limited Income Tax Office, Kks Towers Engee House, 3Rd Floor, 4Th Line R.R. Pet, Eluru – 534002 Chadramouli Nagar, Guntur – 522007 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aadcs1442E] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate : Dr. Aparna Villuri,Sr.Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2025

Section 201(1)Section 40

dated 30.06.2023. 2. At the outset, it is noticed from the appeal records that there is a delay of 20 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] drew our attention to the affidavit filed ... beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 20 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur vs. Shivani Cotton Industries Private Limited, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 460/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

ITA 368/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Private Limited, for the assessment year 2016- 2017. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the Revenue is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. Sri Badicala Yadagiri, learned CIT-DR for the Revenue, supporting the order of the Assessing Officer submitted that, learned CIT(A) ought ... issue alive in the hands of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) should have confirm the addition till the disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal. The Learned DR further submitted that, although, the assessee claims to have given huge amount of advance to the above company, but, going

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Guntur vs. Potti Kumara Naga Venkata Sai Chakravarthy, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

ITA 367/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Income Tax Officer, Guntur vs. Madhusushana Venkata Subba Rao Potti, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

ITA 359/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Ms.Vijayasai Lakshmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G