← All Phrases

“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

Mondelez India Foods Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Cadbury India Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT, Range 5 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is allowed/partly

ITA 7269/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.7269/Mum/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2015-16 M/S Mondelez India Foods Private Limited (Formerly Known As Cadbury India Limited), Mondelez House, Unit No.2001, 20Th Floor Tower-3 (Wing C) India Bulls Finance Centre), Parel, Mumbai-400 013 Pan : Aaac0460H ........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-5(1)(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistri, Sr. Advocate Shri Hiten Chande Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :18.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 234C

Aggrieved, the assessee filed its objections before the DRP. The DRPconfirmed the adjustments/disallowances made by the TPO/Assessing Officer. The assessee, therefore, is in appeal before the Tribunal against the final assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 31.10.2019 pursuant to theDRP directions dated 23.09.2019. 7. The Ld. Counsel

Amar Chemicals, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 15, Delhi

ITA 3981/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Sh. Sachin Kumar, CA
Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessment order for making fresh assessment de novo. 4. Against the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing Ld. Counsel of the assessee argued only on the issue involved in ground no. 1 relating to service

Sarena Private Limited, Delhi vs. PCIT Central, Delhi-3, Delhi

ITA 2480/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

also held the reassessment to be bad in law on jurisdictional ground. Against the order of the AAC the Revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal and specifically raised the plea that the question of jurisdiction to reopen the assessment having been expressly given up by the assessee

Sarena Private Limited, Delhi vs. Pr, CIT Centre Delhi-3, Delhi

ITA 2479/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

also held the reassessment to be bad in law on jurisdictional ground. Against the order of the AAC the Revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal and specifically raised the plea that the question of jurisdiction to reopen the assessment having been expressly given up by the assessee

Late Shri Som Prakash Sethi ( Through Legal Heir Mr. Aman Sethi), New Delhi vs. ACIT Cricle-28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3670/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Late Shri Som Prakash Sethi Vs Acit, (Through Legal Heir Mr. Aman Circle-28(1), Sethi), S-541, Greater Kailash New Delhi. Part-Ii, South Delhi, New Delhi-110048. Pan-Abyps3902L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Akash Ojha, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawri, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2025 Order

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 68

International Ltd. was upheld and other additions were partly deleted. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein following grounds of appeal are raised by the assessee:- 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2568/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2567/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2268/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2266/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2086/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2082/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2081/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2080/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2079/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghazibad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2078/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2077/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2076/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Ghaziabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1941/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Shri Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Vs Dcit, R-5/21, Raj Nagar, Central Circle, Ghaziabad-201002. Ghaziabad Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs Umesh Kumar Bajaj, Central Circle, House No.21, Sector-5, Ghaziabad Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad-201002. Pan-Abcpb4457B Appellant Respondent

Section 1

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal wherein the following grounds of appeal are taken: 1. “That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction

Saint Marys School, Mainpuri vs. ADIT, Exepmtion Circle, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1667/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2014-15] St. Marys Education Vs Dcit (Exemption), Society, Our Lady Circle, Ghaziabad Fatima Secondary School, Ram Ghat Road, Aligarh, U.P-201002. Pan-Aaats4351G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr [Assessment Year : 2019-20] Saint Marys School, Vs Asst. Director Of Opp. Kotwali Mainpuri, Income Tax, Uttar Pradesh-205001. Exemption Circle, Pan-Aaets1727L Ghaziabad. Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vikesh Bansal, Ca Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : Both The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 15.12.2023 & 31.03.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre & 1667/Del/2023 (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Against The Intimation U/S 143(1) By Cpc Dated 25.11.2019 & 26.05.2020 For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2019- 20 Respectively.

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 250

total receipts declared by the appellant society at INR 9,89,99,709/-. 10. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- & 1667/Del/2023 1. “Because Amount applied for capital expenditure