← 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

Vasantha Perumal, Salem vs. ITO Ward I(6), Salem

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

ITA 721/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 721/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 Ms. Vasantha Perumal, The Income Tax Officer, 1/313. Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Vs. Ward 1(6), Puliyankuruchi Post, Salem. Gangavalli Taluk, Salem – 636 101. Pan: Atupv 3076C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Pryati Sharma, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Pryati Sharma, JCIT
Section 250Section 271A

received the notice dated 06.01.2025 to recover the outstanding demand. Thereafter, the assessee took steps to contact the Income Tax professional and filed appeal before the Tribunal, resulting in a delay of 38 days. On perusal of the same, we find there is sufficient reason for delay in filing this ... appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A)’s order is ex- parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the four notices

Shri Sampathraj Vimalchand, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(2), Chennai

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

ITA 691/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 691/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 Shri Sampathraj Vimalchand, The Income Tax Officer, 3-C Pallai Street, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 8(2), Kundrathoor, Chennai. Chennai – 600 069. Pan: Adipv 2433M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Pryati Sharma, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pryati Sharma, JCIT
Section 250

assessee came to know that order has been passed and uploaded. Immediately, the assessee’s chartered accountant advised the assessee to file appeal before the Tribunal and the appeal was filed with a delay of 34 days. On perusal of the same, we find there is sufficient reason for delay ... filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits