← 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

Vikram Tatyaba Chatur, Satara vs. Income Tax Office Ward 3, Satara

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

ITA 2376/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 15 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal, for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation ... sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: On facts and in law, without prejudice to each other, 1. The Ld.CIT-A erred in dismissing

Pudumjee Paper Products Limited, Pune vs. ACIT Circle 8 Pune, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2079/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 249Section 250

present appeal is treated as dismissed.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Addl./JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 4 ITA.No.2079/PUN./2024 “The following grounds are taken without prejudice to each other - On facts

Akshay Nitin Malu, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer, Sangli

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

ITA 1651/PUN/2024[AY 2022-23]Status: HeardITAT Pune03 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 115BSection 139Section 32

Chapter VI-A amounting to Rs.1,63,260/-. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Addl. CIT(A), NFAC erred

Anup Nayak, Raniganj vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 64/KOL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraanup Nayak, Commissioner Of Income 161, P.N. Malia Road, Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi Vs Raniganj, West Bengal - 713325 (Pan: Adfpn8917M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

pointed out any delay in the filing of the appeal, however, it is observed from the acknowledgement report of e- filing of appeal before the Tribunal that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 21.07.2023 was received on 21.07.2023, while the appeal has been filed on 10.01.2024. Thus, there ... appeal. 3 Anup Nayak, AY: 2014-15 2.1 Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. Sr. DR and the record

K K Spun India Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-2 New Delhi, Jhandewalan Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

filed before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: “1. Based on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order ... protective basis and uphold the addition made on account of short terms capital gains. 14. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. Unjust Addition of ₹1,54,00,000/- as Undisclosed Short-Term Capital Gain

K K Spun India Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Jhandewalan Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

filed before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: “1. Based on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order ... protective basis and uphold the addition made on account of short terms capital gains. 14. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. Unjust Addition of ₹1,54,00,000/- as Undisclosed Short-Term Capital Gain

Power Links Transmission Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4599/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Powerlinks, Transmission Ltd. Vs Additional 10Th Floor, Dlf Tower-A, Commissioner Of District Centre, Jasola, Income Tax, Spl. Range New Delhi. 7 New Delhi Pan No. Aabct7775M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3ASection 80I

appeal before the Ld CIT(A), who vide his order dated 19-03-2019 dismissed the appeal, against which the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. A.R of the assessee company has stated that reasons to believe can never be the outcome of a change of opinion

Padma Rao Thigulla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward 10(4), It Towers, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1160/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1160/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2025-26) Telugu Neravu Vs. Income Tax Officer Srikalahasti Ward -1 Pan:Aaett4108J Chittoor (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri T. Ram Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 17/09/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri T. Ram Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12A

course of action against the said order and it took some time which caused the delay of 45 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate

Shri Kamaluddin Popatlal Surani, Vapi vs. PCIT, Valsad

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

ITA 666/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.666/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Kamaluddin Popatlal Surani, Vs. The Pcit, A/12, Golden Park, Kabrastan Road, Valsad Vapi - 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajyps2442M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh Upadhyaya, Ar Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 144Section 148Section 253(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 56(2)(x)

terms of provisions of section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, the assessee stated that revision order of PCIT, Valsad dated 15.03.2024 has been served electronically through Income-tax Portal. Appeal ... assessee was not negligent but due to lack of advice of the earlier tax consultant, the delay has occurred in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The reasons given in the affidavit would constitute sufficient cause for delay in filing this appeal. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit

Shree Aadinath Education and Charitable Trust, Surat vs. CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1128/SRT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1123 & 1124/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Surat Diamond Cutting & Polishing Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Cluster Spv Trust, Ahmedabad E-103, Jaldarshan Flats, Singanpur Road, Surat – 395004, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts3503M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1125 & 1126/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Bavangam Navgam Bhavsar Care Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad Shop No.02, Plot No.220, Vinayak Nagar, 120 Ft Bamroli Road, Udhana, Surat - 394210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaftb3929A (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127 & 1128/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Shree Aadinath Educational & Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad C-401, Icon Heights, Brts Road, Puna, Saroli, Surat – 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abits4657C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form No.10AB was rejected and the provisional registration was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that order passed by the CIT(E) is an ex parte order, as the assessee could

Shree Aadinath Educational and Charitable Trust, Surat vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1127/SRT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1123 & 1124/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Surat Diamond Cutting & Polishing Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Cluster Spv Trust, Ahmedabad E-103, Jaldarshan Flats, Singanpur Road, Surat – 395004, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts3503M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1125 & 1126/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Bavangam Navgam Bhavsar Care Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad Shop No.02, Plot No.220, Vinayak Nagar, 120 Ft Bamroli Road, Udhana, Surat - 394210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaftb3929A (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127 & 1128/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Shree Aadinath Educational & Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad C-401, Icon Heights, Brts Road, Puna, Saroli, Surat – 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abits4657C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form No.10AB was rejected and the provisional registration was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that order passed by the CIT(E) is an ex parte order, as the assessee could

Bavangam Navgam Bha vs. Ar Care Charitable Trust, Suratvs.CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1125/SRT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1123 & 1124/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Surat Diamond Cutting & Polishing Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Cluster Spv Trust, Ahmedabad E-103, Jaldarshan Flats, Singanpur Road, Surat – 395004, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts3503M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1125 & 1126/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Bavangam Navgam Bhavsar Care Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad Shop No.02, Plot No.220, Vinayak Nagar, 120 Ft Bamroli Road, Udhana, Surat - 394210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaftb3929A (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127 & 1128/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Shree Aadinath Educational & Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad C-401, Icon Heights, Brts Road, Puna, Saroli, Surat – 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abits4657C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form No.10AB was rejected and the provisional registration was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that order passed by the CIT(E) is an ex parte order, as the assessee could

Surat Diamond Cutting and Polishing Cluster Svp Trust, Surat vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1124/SRT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1123 & 1124/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Surat Diamond Cutting & Polishing Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Cluster Spv Trust, Ahmedabad E-103, Jaldarshan Flats, Singanpur Road, Surat – 395004, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts3503M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1125 & 1126/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Bavangam Navgam Bhavsar Care Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad Shop No.02, Plot No.220, Vinayak Nagar, 120 Ft Bamroli Road, Udhana, Surat - 394210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaftb3929A (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127 & 1128/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Shree Aadinath Educational & Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad C-401, Icon Heights, Brts Road, Puna, Saroli, Surat – 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abits4657C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form No.10AB was rejected and the provisional registration was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that order passed by the CIT(E) is an ex parte order, as the assessee could

Surat Diamond Cutting and Polishing Cluster Spv Trust, Surat vs. CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1123/SRT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1123 & 1124/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Surat Diamond Cutting & Polishing Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Cluster Spv Trust, Ahmedabad E-103, Jaldarshan Flats, Singanpur Road, Surat – 395004, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts3503M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1125 & 1126/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Bavangam Navgam Bhavsar Care Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad Shop No.02, Plot No.220, Vinayak Nagar, 120 Ft Bamroli Road, Udhana, Surat - 394210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaftb3929A (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127 & 1128/Srt/2024 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Shree Aadinath Educational & Vs. The Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad C-401, Icon Heights, Brts Road, Puna, Saroli, Surat – 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abits4657C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form No.10AB was rejected and the provisional registration was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that order passed by the CIT(E) is an ex parte order, as the assessee could

Shastri Lal, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3918/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 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

Dilbag Singh, Rohtak vs. Income Tax Officer, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3909/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 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

Dhananjay Sanjogta Foundation, Noida vs. CIT Exemption, Income Tax Department, Lucknow

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 2464/DEL/2024[24-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

belongs to the Assessee and due to non-handling of the tax matter by the professional, there was a delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. AR reiterating the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax CC 1 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Jatin Rajnikant Shah, Mumbai

ITA 4468/MUM/2024[2017]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

assessee has not offered any comments on violation of section 11 caused by the objects of the Trust-deed. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(E). 3. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The assessee is a Charitable

Kamal Clearing and Forwarding Agency Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 1575/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik
Section 10Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

assessing officer is upheld and these grounds of appeal are accordingly dismissed.” 5. Being aggrieved, the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in Paragraph 2 above. 6. We have given thoughtful consideration to rival submissions and have perused the material on record

Netenrich Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 870/HYD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jan 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: SHRI MANJUNATHA G. (Accountant Member), SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 12A

section 115 TD of I.T.Act, 1961.” 11. Aggrieved by the order of the learned PCIT, Central, the assessee society is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 12. C.A. Shri C. Maheswar Reddy, learned counsel for the assessee along with C.A. Shri K.C. Devadas, submitted that the Ld. PCIT (Central) erred