← 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

Allcargo Gati Limited(Formally Known As Gati Limited), Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2) Hyderabad, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 1721/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)

this regard, ld.AR has submitted that the assessee has entered into agreement with slump sale of shipping business. The department has filed the appeal before the Tribunal saying that the profit earned on account of slump sale of shipping business is subjected to tax, for which the assessee has already

Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex, Kakinada vs. Principalmcommissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 234/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.234/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex V. Pr.Cit Aayakar Bhavan 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Dabagardens – 530020 Kakinada – 533016, Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abdfs4641P]

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263

revenue, thereby set-aside the order the passed by the Ld. AO. Against the order of the Ld.Pr.CIT dated 29.03.2023, assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal vide its order dated 29.11.2023 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the Ld.Pr.CIT to give one more opportunity

Ratnakar Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 850/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 850/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Ratnakar Merchandise Pvt. Limited,…………Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Aadcr8555M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 20, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal raising the following issues:- 3 Ratnakar Merchandise Pvt. Limited (1) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Sharma Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Malda vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Malda

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

ITA 1944/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 1944/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sharma Real Estate Private Limited,…………Appellant 43, N.S. Road, English Bazar, Malda-732101, West Bengal [Pan:Aakcs8979F] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Circle-3(1), Malda, Income Tax Office, Netaji Market Complex, 1St Floor, Rathbari, Malda-732101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Ashim Prakash, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(2)

Appeals) passed an ex- parte order basing on the material available on record. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the appeal was filed belatedly and the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that

Ramkrishna Mandal Institute of Education, Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 1927/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer basing on the material available on record. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard both the sides. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals

Bansal Foundation, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

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

ITA 107/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 107/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Bansal Foundation,………………………………Appellant 119, Park Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700016 [Pan:Aadtb0630J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Ms. Puja Somani, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

record. The ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and pleaded for one more opportunity of being heard before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. It was the submission of the ld. D.R. that

Kochukunju Raghu, Perinjankonam vs. ITO, Ward-72(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 540/COCH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 Kocukunju Raghu Sreelayam, Perinjankonal Vadasserikonam 695143 [Pan: Ajbpr0539F] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 3, Thiruvananthapuram .......... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajiv, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148

case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461 and few other judgements. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. I have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. I find that

Kalathindavida Muhammad Riyas, Kannur vs. ITO, Ward-4, Kannur

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

ITA 353/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kalathindavida Muhammad Riyas K.V. House, Pattayam Kolanchery, Kannur 670601 [Pan: Awlpm4967F] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 4, Kannur .......... Respondent

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. When the appeal was called none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor is there any application for adjournment. Therefore

Karikkakom Sree Chamundi Temple Trust, Trivandrum vs. The CIT Exemptions, Kochi

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

ITA 446/COCH/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Alan Dev, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 12A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Trichy vs. Arunachalam Senthilkumar, Trichy

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

ITA 2053/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2053/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Arunachalam Senthilkumar, Ward 2(1), 69, Vanapattarai Street, Trichy. Teppakulam, Trichy 620 002. [Pan:Aawps2788R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.05.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. We Find That This Appeal Was Filed With A Delay Of 2 Days. The Appellant-Revenue Filed An Affidavit Stating Reasons For The Said Delay. On Perusal Of The Same, We Find That The Reasons Stated By The Revenue Are Bonafide, Which Really Prevented In Filing The Appeal In Time. Thus, The Delay Of 2 Days Is Condoned & Admitted The Appeal For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CITFor Respondent: None

CBDT Circular No. 06/2024, dated 17.09.2024. The ld. DR fairly conceded and being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from filing the appeal before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹.60,00,000/- in this appeal. Thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle, Madurai vs. Thathi Ramasamy Naicker Varadharajan, Aruppukottai

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

ITA 1266/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1266/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Thathi Ramasamy Naicker Income Tax, Varadharajan, No. 1, T. Ramasamy Corporate Circle , Naicker Street, Vadugarkottai, Madurai. Aruppukottai 626 101. [Pan:Aagpv2535B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, The Ld. Ar Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate Submits That The Tax Effect In The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Less Than The Monetary Limit Of ₹.60,00,000/- Fixed By The Cbdt To File An Appeal By The Revenue Before The Tribunal As Per The Cbdt Circular No.

For Appellant: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CITFor Respondent: Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate

I.T.A. No.1266/Chny/23 06/2024, dated 17.09.2024. The ld. DR fairly conceded and being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from filing the appeal before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹.60,00,000/- in this appeal. Thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed

Mulkh Raj Mehta and Sons HUF, Hisar vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2406/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 2406/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Mulkh Raj Mehta & Sons Huf, Vs Pr. Cit, 374, Sector-15A, Hisar, Rohtak, Haryana-125001 Haryana-124001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaihm9927L Assessee By : Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, Ca & Sh. Surajh Bhan Nain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Order Of Pcit, Rohtak Dated 18.03.2024 In Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1062878615(1), In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, CA &For Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145B(1)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

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

Kamal Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3401/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271

order dated 30/06/2018. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2014-15, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. 3400/Del/2023(A.Y 2008-09) and ITA No. 3402/Del/2023(A.Y 2014-15), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide ... DCIT 9.3 In appeal the learned CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved against it, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 9.4 Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the synopsis filed on behalf of the assessee and submitted that

DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Mg Housing Pvt Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 213/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 40

Form-36 filed by the revenue. Hence the same falls below the threshold monetary limit enabling the revenue to prefer appeal before the Tribunal ITA Nos. 212 & 213/Del/2023 M/s. MG Housing Pvt Ltd in view of the CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17/09/2024. Hence, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Mg Housing Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 212/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 40

Form-36 filed by the revenue. Hence the same falls below the threshold monetary limit enabling the revenue to prefer appeal before the Tribunal ITA Nos. 212 & 213/Del/2023 M/s. MG Housing Pvt Ltd in view of the CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17/09/2024. Hence, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Kamal Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1221/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271

order dated 30/06/2018. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2014-15, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. 3400/Del/2023(A.Y 2008-09) and ITA No. 3402/Del/2023(A.Y 2014-15), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide ... DCIT 9.3 In appeal the learned CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved against it, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 9.4 Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the synopsis filed on behalf of the assessee and submitted that

Kamal Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1220/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271

order dated 30/06/2018. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2014-15, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. 3400/Del/2023(A.Y 2008-09) and ITA No. 3402/Del/2023(A.Y 2014-15), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide ... DCIT 9.3 In appeal the learned CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved against it, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 9.4 Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the synopsis filed on behalf of the assessee and submitted that

Kamal Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1219/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271

order dated 30/06/2018. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2014-15, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. 3400/Del/2023(A.Y 2008-09) and ITA No. 3402/Del/2023(A.Y 2014-15), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide ... DCIT 9.3 In appeal the learned CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved against it, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 9.4 Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the synopsis filed on behalf of the assessee and submitted that

Brahmakshatriya Kanji Damji Hindu Sarvajanik Dharamshala Palitana, Bhavnagar vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 744/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2024

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

Exemption) rejecting the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12A of the Act, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, the ld. AR argued that what is to be examined is whether the trust had charitable objectives or not and qualified as charitable entity

Dimple Alnesh Somji, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(3), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 973/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Nitin RanderFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

ground no.1 raised by the appellant is DISMISSED.” 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. “On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. Assessing Officer