← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-42(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jekin Enterprise, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed, and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3109/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3109/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3107/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) Acit-42(1), Mumbai V/S. Jekin Enterprise Room No. 732, 7Th Floor, बिधम A 604, Prem Nagar, Kautilya Bhavan, G. Block, Building No. 5, Bkc, Bandra East, Mandepeshwar Road, Mumbai-400051 Boriwali (W.), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafj0648R Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 177/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 176/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 173/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024)

For Appellant: Shri Anant paiFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik
Section 147Section 250Section 68

deleted both the additions made u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against which the assessee has also filed its cross-objections. P a g e | 12 ITA No. 3111 & 31110/Mum/2024

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 42(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jekin Enterprise, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed, and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3107/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3109/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3107/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) Acit-42(1), Mumbai V/S. Jekin Enterprise Room No. 732, 7Th Floor, बिधम A 604, Prem Nagar, Kautilya Bhavan, G. Block, Building No. 5, Bkc, Bandra East, Mandepeshwar Road, Mumbai-400051 Boriwali (W.), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafj0648R Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 177/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 176/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 173/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024)

For Appellant: Shri Anant paiFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik
Section 147Section 250Section 68

deleted both the additions made u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against which the assessee has also filed its cross-objections. P a g e | 12 ITA No. 3111 & 31110/Mum/2024

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-42(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jekin Enterprise, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed, and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3105/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3109/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3107/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) Acit-42(1), Mumbai V/S. Jekin Enterprise Room No. 732, 7Th Floor, बिधम A 604, Prem Nagar, Kautilya Bhavan, G. Block, Building No. 5, Bkc, Bandra East, Mandepeshwar Road, Mumbai-400051 Boriwali (W.), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafj0648R Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 177/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3111/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 176/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3110/Mum/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-13) प्रनि आपत्ति सं./ Co No. 173/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3105/Mum/2024)

For Appellant: Shri Anant paiFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik
Section 147Section 250Section 68

deleted both the additions made u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against which the assessee has also filed its cross-objections. P a g e | 12 ITA No. 3111 & 31110/Mum/2024

Padam Chand Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 35(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7418/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Padam Chand Gupta, Vs. Assistant Commissioner 1-C Court Road Civil Lines Of Income Tax, Income Tax Delhi 110054 Circle 35(1) New Delhi Pan No. Aanpg5120C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23

appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his order dated21-09-2017 partly allowed the appeal against which the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.The ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee is the owner of the various residential properties

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Faridkot, Bsnl Building vs. M/S Vohra Solvex Pvt. Ltd, Sadiq Road

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69C

enough grounds to accept the contention of the appellants, and accordingly, theses grounds of appeal are dismissed.” 7. Now, the department is in appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds contained in Form No. 36. 8. The ld. DR argued that the ld. first appellate authority was not justified

Showkat Shafi, S.O. Mohammad Yatoo, Yatoo Manzil Nagam Chadoora Budgam, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(3), Srinagar

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

ITA 284/ASR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Kushal Chopra, C. A
Section 144Section 250

first appellate authority and thereafter he has contacted his new counsel by whose guidance and help he has managed to file the appeal before the Tribunal on 14th May, 2024 which is belated by 92 days and he prayed for condonation of delay for admission of appeal to be heard

Suniti Chaturbhuj Social Foundation, Hajipur vs. CIT(Exemption), Patna

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

ITA 620/PAT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 620/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2024-2025 Suniti Chaturbhuj Social Foundation,....……Appellant C/O. Gyanendra Priyadarshi, Andarkila, Hajipur, Vaishali-844101, Bihar [Pan:Abhcs4841E] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption),.Respondent Patna, 2Nd Floor, C.R. Building, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

parte order dated 21.08.2024 dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 4. Dissatisfied with the decision of the ld. CIT(Exemption), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside

Jaya Singh, Patna vs. Dc, Ac Circle-1, Bhagalpur, Bihar

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

ITA 430/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 07 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to condone the delay since

Pioneer Education Society, Haryana vs. ITO, Patna

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

ITA 406/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 07 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to condone the delay since

Jayesh Jadavji Thakkar, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 3(2)(1), Surat

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

ITA 930/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.930/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Jayesh Jadavji Thakkar, Vs. The Ito, 402, Paradise Apartment, Mahadev Ward - 3(2)(1), Faliu, Katargam, Surat - 395004 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajmpt4689H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69A

learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that the CIT(A) has passed order u/s 250 of the Act on 03.07.2024. The appeal before this Tribunal was required to be filed within 60 days, i.e. on or before 02.09.2024. However, the assessee filed the appeal on 03.09.2024. Therefore, there ... return of income. Hence, he dismissed the appeal of appellant. 8. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee filed ITA No.930/SRT/2024/AY.2017-18 Jayesh Jadavji Thakkar a paper book including copies of ITZ Cash Cards agreement

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Adajan vs. Nita Ravi Khandelwal, Ghod Dod Road, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 813/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.813/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Nita Ravi Khandelwal, Ward – 1(3)(1), 33, Pratistha Awas, Ghod Dod Road, Surat Surat – 395007, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Agsps2820A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Jaikishan Goel, Ca Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 250(2)Section 68

result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) relied on the order of both lower authorities. He took us through the assessment order and appellate order passed

Sabirhusen Rasulbhai Malek, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 468/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.468/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Sabirhusen Rasulbhai Malek Vs. The Ito, Indian Oil Pump, Devaliya Ward - 2(1), Narmada, Devaliya So - 391121 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aoppm9978Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kinjal V. Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 270ASection 69A

Hence, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee ITA No.468/SRT/2024/AY.2017-18 Sabirhusen Rasulbhai Malek filed a paper book and submitted that the assessee

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3)(1), Surat vs. Hindustan Steel and Cement, Althan-Bhatar, Surat

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 266/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hindustan Steel & Cement, Ward - 2(3)(1), Althan-Bhatar, Plot No. 1D, Sai Surat Ashish Society, Althan Bhatar, University Road, Surat - 394201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaefh 5030 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 142(1)Section 250Section 68

allowed appeal of the appellant. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that the appellant has paid huge interest of Rs.19

Sanskrutik Raksha Samiti, Bamroli, Surat vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1239/SRT/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1239/Srt/2024 (Physical Hearing) Sanskrutik Raksha Samiti, Vs. The Cit (Exemption), 350-351, Kashi Nagar Society, Udhna So, Ahmedabad Bamroli – 394210, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abats4036R4 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 19/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submitted English translation of Memorandum of Association (MoA) of the assessee-trust, replies dated

Rahul Coal India Private Limited, Surat vs. ITO TDS-2, Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1220/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1220/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) Rahul Coal India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Addl. Cit (Tds), 429-432 Golden Point, Ring Road, Surat, Nr. Bsnl Office, Surat-395 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcr1044D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 133ASection 201(1)Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 250Section 271CSection 271C(1)(a)

relied on various decisions as mentioned in the appellate order. 4. Further, aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee filed a paper book and submitted that assessee did not receive any notice

Rajsthan Yuva Sangh Surat, Surat vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the matter is restored to the file of Ld

ITA 1209/SRT/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1209/Srt/2024 (Physical Hearing) Rajsthan Yuva Sangh, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 67/38, Gayatri Nagar, Poona Ahmedabad Gaon, Surat – 395010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatr7026D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

section 80G(5) was rejected and provisional approval was also cancelled. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submitted that the trust has been working for welfare of various under privileged sections

Kishordas Tulsidas Vaishnav, Vapi vs. ITO, Ward-5, Vapi

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

ITA 1152/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1152/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Kishordas Tulsidas Vaishnav Vs. The Ito, 1, Beside Dilkush Dabeli, Surya Ward – 5, Hospital Road, Gunjan Gidc, Vapi Vapi - 396195 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Akrpv8376R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

made u/s 69A of the Act. ITA No.1152/SRT/2024/AY.11-12 Kishordas T Vaishnav 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant has raised grounds on validity of reopening u/s 147 of the Act, inadequate opportunities given

Kummoli Shareef, Kozhikode vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 253/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Divya Ravindran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

party. The learned CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal by confirming the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. It is contended that the CIT(A), without adverting to the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee

Kummoli Shareef, Kozhikode vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 252/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Divya Ravindran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

party. The learned CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal by confirming the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. It is contended that the CIT(A), without adverting to the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee

Kummoli Shareef, Kozhikode vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Divya Ravindran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

party. The learned CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal by confirming the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. It is contended that the CIT(A), without adverting to the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee