← 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

Parampujya Bhagari Baba Goshala, Nashik vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2101/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2101 & 2100/Pun/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 3. Aggrieved appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called

Parampujya Bhagari Baba Goshala, Nashik vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2100/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2101 & 2100/Pun/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 3. Aggrieved appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called

Soniya Holkar Charitable Trust, Nashik vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2097/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2096 & 2097/Pun/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 3. Aggrieved appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called

Soniya Holkar Charitable Trust, Nashik vs. CIT (E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2096/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2096 & 2097/Pun/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 3. Aggrieved appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called

Shriman Sampatlal Premraj Surana Charitable Trust, Nashik vs. CIT (E), Pune

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

ITA 2095/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2095/Pun/2024 Shriman Sampatlal Premraj Surana Vs. The Cit (Exemption) Charitable Trust, Pune 546, Manmad Bhagwan Mahavir Path, Nandgaon, Nashik, Nashik – 423 104 Maharashtra Pan : Aapts4358E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 3 Shriman Sampatlal Premraj Surana Charitable Trust 3. Aggrieved appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called for, none appeared on behalf

Vidyarthi Vikas Mandal, Sangli vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 2091/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2090 & 2091/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

respectively and the same were disposed of by the ld.CIT(A) vide the impugned orders 17.07.2023 & 29.12.2023. Aggrieved assessee filed two appeals before the Tribunal which are numbered as ITA No.2090/PUN/2024 & 2091/PUN/2024. Since the issue on which the appellant agitated before the Tribunal is one and same, the ld. Authorised ... 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 5. Aggrieved appellant trust is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 6. Before us, the ld. AR submitted

Vidyarthi Vikas Mandal, Sangli vs. CIT (E), Pune

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

ITA 2090/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2090 & 2091/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

respectively and the same were disposed of by the ld.CIT(A) vide the impugned orders 17.07.2023 & 29.12.2023. Aggrieved assessee filed two appeals before the Tribunal which are numbered as ITA No.2090/PUN/2024 & 2091/PUN/2024. Since the issue on which the appellant agitated before the Tribunal is one and same, the ld. Authorised ... 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 5. Aggrieved appellant trust is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal assailing the impugned order denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act. 6. Before us, the ld. AR submitted

Rani Laxmibai Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat. Ltd., Jamner, Dist-Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(4) Jalgaon, Jalgaon

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

ITA 1336/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1336/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vinay V. KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

ld.CIT(A) countenanced the action made by the CPC relying on provisions of section 80AC(ii) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order passed by ld.CIT(A), relying on the decision of Pune Bench in the case of Finolex Industries

Murali Nukala, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle 3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1148/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1148/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Murali Nukala Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Abfpn1674F] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Chaitanya Kumar, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Reema Yadav, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 09/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22/12/2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18 On The Following Grounds :

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Kumar, ARFor Respondent: : Shri Reema Yadav, DR
Section 115Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

objection. 3. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant reasons given by the appellant for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. After hearing both the sides, we find that the reasons given by the appellant for not filing the appeal on or before ... their appellate order, upheld the addition and dismissed the appeal. 6. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee, referring to ledger account of the appellant in the books of M/s Nookala Omprakash Murali

Indur Developers and Agencies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nizamabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1023/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1023/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Indur Developers & Vs. Dcit, Circle-1 Agencies Private Limited Nizamabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aabci4254Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.Rama Rao,Ar (Through Virtual Mode) Ms.S.Sandhya, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 09/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/02/2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18 On The Following Grounds :

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao,ARFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 144Section 147Section 37

dismissed. 4. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant reasons given by the appellant for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. After hearing both the sides, we find that the reasons given by the appellant for not filing the appeal on or before ... case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjee and Another, 118 ITR 461 (SC). 7. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee, Shri S.Rama Rao submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) is erred in sustaining the addition made

Vedre Pranathie, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1004/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1004/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vedre Pranathie Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-4(4) [Pan : Abzpv3765B] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V.Raghuram, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 09/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18/06/2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. At The Outset, We Find That The Registry Has Noticed Delay Of 46 Days In The Appeal Filed By The Assessee. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Explained That Although The Ld.Cit(A) Passed Order On 18.06.2024, The Appellant Has Received The Impugned Order Of The Ld.Cit(A) On 03.09.2024 & If We

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

therefore, if we consider the date of service of order on 03.09.2024, then there is no delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal, as noticed by the Registry. Therefore, the arguments of the assessee, in light of affidavit have been accepted and the defect notice issued by the Registry ... towards cash deposited u/s 69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine

Girjan Co-Op Marketing Society Limited, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 274/VIZ/2024[2016-17S]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri S. Balakrishnan

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

record that there is a delay of 24 days in filing all the four appeals. With respect to the belated filing of these appeals before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed affidavits dated 23/07/2024 wherein the assessee has stated that Sri V. Krishna Prasada Rao, Manager and Authorized Signatory ... assessee, was not well during the relevant period and therefore, the assessee filed the present appeals before the Tribunal with a delay 24 days. The assessee has also produced Medical Certificate to substantiate its claim. On a perusal of the reasons advanced by the assessee ie., the illness

Girjan Co-Op Marketing Society Limited, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 273/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri S. Balakrishnan

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

record that there is a delay of 24 days in filing all the four appeals. With respect to the belated filing of these appeals before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed affidavits dated 23/07/2024 wherein the assessee has stated that Sri V. Krishna Prasada Rao, Manager and Authorized Signatory ... assessee, was not well during the relevant period and therefore, the assessee filed the present appeals before the Tribunal with a delay 24 days. The assessee has also produced Medical Certificate to substantiate its claim. On a perusal of the reasons advanced by the assessee ie., the illness

Girijan Co-Op Marketing Society Limited, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 272/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri S. Balakrishnan

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

record that there is a delay of 24 days in filing all the four appeals. With respect to the belated filing of these appeals before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed affidavits dated 23/07/2024 wherein the assessee has stated that Sri V. Krishna Prasada Rao, Manager and Authorized Signatory ... assessee, was not well during the relevant period and therefore, the assessee filed the present appeals before the Tribunal with a delay 24 days. The assessee has also produced Medical Certificate to substantiate its claim. On a perusal of the reasons advanced by the assessee ie., the illness

Girijan Co-Op Markrting Society Limited, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 271/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri S. Balakrishnan

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

record that there is a delay of 24 days in filing all the four appeals. With respect to the belated filing of these appeals before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed affidavits dated 23/07/2024 wherein the assessee has stated that Sri V. Krishna Prasada Rao, Manager and Authorized Signatory ... assessee, was not well during the relevant period and therefore, the assessee filed the present appeals before the Tribunal with a delay 24 days. The assessee has also produced Medical Certificate to substantiate its claim. On a perusal of the reasons advanced by the assessee ie., the illness

Aisha Asharaf, Pathanamthitta vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kollam

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

ITA 603/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Aisha Asharaf Rajagiri Leather Park Central Junction, Adoor Pathanamthitta 689645 [Pan: Ailpa1946L] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 1, Kollam .......... Respondent

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 and a few other orders. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The learned A.R. has filed a letter seeking adjournment on the ground the senior partner of the CA firm

Vegetable & Fruit Promotion Council Keralam(Vfpck), Kakkanad vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

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

ITA 494/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vegetable & Fruit Promotion Council Keralam (Vfpck) Mythri Bhavan, Near Doordarshan Kendra Kakkanad, Cochi 682037 [Pan: Aaatv6575D] .......... Appellant Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ernakulam .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri R. Ramachandran, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramachandran, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 271BSection 274Section 44ASection 8

levy of penalty for non prosecution without adverting to the statements of facts of the case. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the provisions of section 44AB of the Act have no application to the assessee

M/S Calicut Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption), Kochi

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 492/COCH/2024[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2025-2026

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Calicut Charitable Trust 5/3068Q Hira Centre Post Box No. 833, Mavoor Road Calicut 673004 [Pan: Aaatc5798D] .......... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

date of hearing. Therefore, the CIT (Exemption) rejected the application for final registration in form 10AB. 4. Being aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. When the appeal was called none appeared on behest of the assessee nor there any application for adjournment. Therefore, we proceed to dispose

Attu Puratt Ismail, Thalassery vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kannur

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

ITA 302/COCH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 Attu Puratt Ismail Attu Purat House, Kadavathur Thalassery, Kannur 670676 [Pan: Abfpi7474M] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 2, Kannur .......... Respondent

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144

case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 118 ITR 461and few other judgements. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The learned A.R. has filed a letter seeking adjournment on the ground the senior partner of the CA firm

Jithu John, Calicut vs. Income Tax Officer, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 Jithu John Flat No. 9D, Pvs Nakshatra Ymca Cross Road Kozhikode 673001 [Pan: Ayppj6283P] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 1(2), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant By: ------- None ------- Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2024

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

holding that the assessee has failed to controvert the findings of the AO with documentary evidences. 4. Being aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. When the appeal was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor is there any application for adjournment. Therefore, I proceed