← 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

Ashish Ashok Nirkhe, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax. Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1005/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Ushma Makecha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69Section 69A

years.' Thus, the appellant has fallen short of the evidence bar which would tilt scale in its favour.” 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the final order of assessment passed by the AO pursuant to the directions of the DRP. 4. We heard the parties

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Chopra Strips Limited, Rajasthan

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

ITA 6818/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 6818/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) Dcit-1(1)(1), Mumbai V/S. M/S. Chopra Strips Ltd. बिाम Room No. 579A, 5 Th Floor, D-194-195, Boranada Agro Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- Food Park, Jodhpur, 400020 Rajasthan-342008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccc3063C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal/Shri Satish Gupta राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Yogesh Kumar, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal/ShriFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Chopra Strips Ltd. 5. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. With regard to the sole issue involved, the brief facts are as follows: i. It came to the notice of the Ld. AO that the assessee had made

Ram Ratan Hooda, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 45 (1), Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 982/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69

Delhi who vide order dated 23-12-2024 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.On hearing both the sides, it comes up that the assessee has raised the legal ground and stated that the notice which

Surender Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward 4 (1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 351/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

afresh after making requisite enquiries and proper verification with regard to taxability of interest on enhanced compensation. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds relate thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. Sampark Management Consultancy LLP, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6158/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwaldeputy Commissioner Of Sampark Management Income Tax, Consultancy Llp, Ayakar Bhawan, A-2D, Vs. Fh-07, Near Jaypee Sector, Noida Hospital, Sector-131, U.P.-201301. Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201301. Pan:Acsfs9969E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Amit Geol, Ca & Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv. Department By Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (‘The Cit(A) In Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre Dated 14.10.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2016- 17/10246564 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A) Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Deleted The Additions Made In The Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Act Dated 30.03.2023. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Decided The Appeal In Favour Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Order Of Ld. Pcit U/S 263 For Impugned Year Was Quashed By The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Itat Vide Its Order Dated 23.03.2024 In Ita No.1879/Del/2023. Against This Order, The Revenue Has Preferred Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Allahabad High Court Wherein The Hon’Ble High Court In Ita No. 78/2024 Vide Order Dated 27.11.2024 Dismissed The Appeal

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

dated 22.03.2024 in ITA No.1879/Del/2023 has quashed the order passed u/s 263 by Ld. PCIT, Noida. In the meantime, during the pendency of appeal before the Tribunal, the AO in compliance to the directions given by Ld. PCIT, had framed the order u/s 263/143(3) dated 30.03.2023 wherein the total

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 5000/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Animate Infrastructure Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 4850/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

ACIT, Delhi vs. Grand Estate LLP, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4740/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2

ACIT, Dlehi vs. Grand Estates LLP, Delhi

ITA 4737/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

ACIT, Delhi vs. Grand Estates LLP, Delhi

ITA 4729/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

Karamvir Singh, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, impugned order is quashed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4673/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kailash Khemani, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274Section 274A

confirming levy of penalty u/s.270A of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee in appeal before the Tribunal has raised multiple grounds assailing levy and confirming of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act. The assessee has 2 also raised an additional ground

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatax Inida Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4635/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 2060/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5

DCIT Central Circle 4, New Delhi vs. Grand Estate LLP, New Delhi

ITA 1389/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

identity and the creditworthiness of the parties and therefore, no addition could be made. 7. Against such order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal on the strength of the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2

Lsv Micro Device Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-18, New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 291/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 133ASection 153CSection 250

reduced to Rs.11,28,899/- and further confirmed the disallowance out of salary. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred present appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred both in law and fact in sustaining

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Gurpreet Kochar, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 940/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

There are plethora of Judgments by various High Courts and also the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunals that the respondent in the Appeal before the Tribunal even C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 DCIT Vs. HarpreetKochar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds

DCIT Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Gurmeet Kochar, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 939/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

There are plethora of Judgments by various High Courts and also the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunals that the respondent in the Appeal before the Tribunal even C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 DCIT Vs. HarpreetKochar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds

DCIT Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Harpreet Kochar, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 938/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

There are plethora of Judgments by various High Courts and also the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunals that the respondent in the Appeal before the Tribunal even C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 DCIT Vs. HarpreetKochar without filing an appeal can support the order appealed against on any of the grounds

Sri Guru Rajendra Suri Jain Aradhana Bhavan Trust, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Guntur

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

ITA 7/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.7/Viz/2025

Section 12A

outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 40 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with a petition seeking ... beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 40 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 40 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in its appeal

Gangunaidu Sabbavarapu, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Visakhpatnam

ITA 177/VIZ/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(37)Section 250Section 254Section 96

inclusion of this amount was neither challenged by the assessee nor considered by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The inclusion of the amount was not objected to even in the grounds of appeal as originally filed before the Tribunal. Subsequently