“appeal before the tribunal”

AppealsSection 253Section 25316,033 judgments

The decision most relied on for appeal before the tribunal is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on appeal before the tribunal

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT

2,267

citing judgments

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.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT

223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court

2,040

citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders

349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court

956

citing judgments

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.

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT

389 ITR 326 · 2016 · High Court

241

citing judgments

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.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar

1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported

225

citing judgments

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

392 ITR 244 · 2017 · High Court

202

citing judgments

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

CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.

81 ITR 303 · 1971 · High Court

202

citing judgments

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.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT

317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court

202

citing judgments

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

Mahendrakumar R. Punjabi, Nadiad vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Nadiad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1108/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Prithu Parimal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

impugned assessment year. The appeal is dismissed…” 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is evident from the facts that the Asst

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle, Pune, Swargate vs. Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 829/PUN/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.829 & 827/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions), 1105, Ravivar Peth, Pune-411002 Cirlce – Pune Vs. Pan : Aaats5170R अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assesseeby : Shri V.L. Jain Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2025 Date Of 08-10-2025 Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 3

assessed as Trust and not as AOP. Accordingly, Ground 1 and 2 of the appeal are allowed. 4. Dissatisfied, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle, Pune, Swargate vs. Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 827/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 3

Mohammad Habeeb Uddin, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 8/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.08/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mohammad Habeeb Uddin, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 11-2-323-Cross Bazaar, Ward-7(1), Ghat, Hyderabad, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500004. Pan: Aaqph8462F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Rajesh Vaishnav, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/08/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 08/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Dated 30.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Sri Rajesh Vaishnav, CAFor Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 234ASection 271ASection 69A

assessee, at the threshold of the hearing of the appeal, submitted that there is a delay of 229 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. Elaborating on the reason leading to the delay in filing the appeal, the Ld. AR took us through an application filed ... dated 30.09.2016], in the backdrop of the facts involved in the case before them, wherein delay in filing the appeal before he Tribunal had occurred due to lapse of the assessee’s counsel, observed, that such delay deserves to be condoned, since substantial justice must prevail over technicalities

Veeraballi Naga Basi Reddy, Kadapa vs. ITO., Ward - 1, Kadapa

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 451/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.451/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Veeraballi Naga Basi Reddy, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward 1, Kadapa. Kadapa. Pan: Aszpr1589G (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 31.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144

delay dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) ITA No.451/Hyd/2025 3 dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte without providing an opportunity ... rival submissions of both the parties. At the outset, I find that there is a delay of 15 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed condonation petition seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the delay has occurred on account of Ld. AR being

Srinivasarao Kolasani, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.433/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Srinivasa Rao Kolasani, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad. Ward 9(1), Pan: Ahwpk6333P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Snsr Chinmai, Adv. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 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 26.10.2023 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. The Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2017-18 Was Filed On 15.02.2019 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,76,020/-. The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Vide Order Dated 21.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The

For Appellant: SNSR Chinmai, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

order, dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in limine. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the outset, I find that there is a delay of 436 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee ... delay is a fit case to condone the delay of 436 days. Accordingly, I condone the delay of 436 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 5. I heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available

Mulakala Mohan Krishna, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, SR-AR

Section 143(1)Section 80I

order, which is to the following effect : ITA No.432/Hyd/2025 6 8. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that, the return of income was filed after facing technical issues in the income-tax e-filing portal within

Pallavi Anadha Vrudhaashramam, R R District vs. ITO (Exemptions), Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1285/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1285/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2022-23) M/S. Pallavi Anadha Income Tax Officer Vs. Vrudhaashramam, (Exemptions), Ward 1(3), Hyderabad. R.R. District. Pan: Aabtp6928R (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 06/10/2025 Hearing: घोर्णध की 08/10/2025 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 13.06.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Providing Shelter & Support To Old Age Beggars On Road Sides, Services To Mentally Retarded Persons To The Women & Old Age People. The Return Of

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 250Section 250(6)

dismissed the appeal of the assessee, 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. AO ITA No.1285/Hyd/2025 3 and the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte without providing an opportunity

Mohd Azgar Ali, Nalgonda vs. ITO., Ward-1, Nalgonda

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

ITA 1283/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee Ms. SNSR Chinmai, referring to the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee, submitted that although

Gangamagrotech, Hindupur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hindupur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1217/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Sri TV Vamshidhar, Sr. AR

Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 274Section 44ASection 68

very outset, CA, Ashwani Kumar, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, there is a delay of 268 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The 2 ITA.No.1217/Hyd./2025 assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay and pleaded for condonation of delay in filing ... appeal before the Tribunal. The reasons explained by the assessee for not filing the appeal within the time allowed under the law are that, the learned CIT(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, was passed Order in this case on 30.08.2024. Further, the other appeals for the same assessment year

A R Udyog, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 46(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1166/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 68

sought and 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. 5S. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made and the paper book filed have been examined. It was submitted ... assessee shall not be allowed as a deduction under any head of income. It is viewed that if the approach of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal is accepted, then it would amount to endorsing outright conduct of illegality, contrary to the express provisions of section 69C, which the Appellate

Shri Malkiat Singh, Delhi vs. CIT(Appeal), Delhi

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4366/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhshri Malkiat Singh, Vs.Ito, Ward 45(1), Wz 46/3B, Krishna Puri, New Delhi Gali No. 1, Tilak Nagar, Delhi – 110 018 (Pan:Bsrps2158H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. P.K. Bansal, Adv. & Sh. Tarun Sharma, Ca Respondent By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Bansal, Adv. & Sh. Tarun Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(a)Section 149(1)(b)Section 194C

/NFAC, who vide its impugned order dated 16.06.2025 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that he has raised legal ground that notice under Section

Crest Commercial Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assessing Officer, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1326/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80J

judgment of CC vs Dilip Kumar & Company [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327 (SC). 4. Against the appellate order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The Ld. C'IT (A) NFAC has erred in upholding the disallowance of the deduction u/s 80JJAA

Mohd Gulzar, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 63(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 4097/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

considered opinion, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee is an individual having income from business and filed his return of income

Amarjot Singh Village Babehali Distt Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Gurdaspur G T Road Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 103/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal on facts as well

Amarjot Singh Village Babehali Distt Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 102/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Amarjot Singh Village Babehali Distt Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 101/ASR/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Amarjot Singh, Village Babehali Distt Gurdaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 598/ASR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Amarjot Singh, Gurdaspur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Gurdaspur, Gurdaspur

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 597/ASR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Dinesh Prasad, Gaya vs. ITO, Wrd- 3 (1), Gaya

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

ITA 352/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 144Section 145Section 250Section 68

dated 31.05.2025, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act, dated 23.12.2019. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal without any notice ... cash deposit made in the bank accounts remained unexplained. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Rival submissions were heard and the record and the submissions made have been examined. 5. At the outset the Ld. AR submitted