← 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

Aadi Real Estate Developers Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 928/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Aadi Real Estate Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward 1(1)(1), 402, Sheel Complex, Mayur Ahmedabad Colony, Mithakhali, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aajca 1796 R अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 25.05.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Relating To The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company & Had Filed ‘Nil’ Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year, I.E. Ay 2012-13. Subsequently, On Information Received From Ddit (Inv.), Unit-1 (3), Ahmedabad, By The Assessing Officer That The Assessee Was A Beneficiary Of Accommodation Entry Taken Through Dummy Companies Run & Controlled By One Jignesh Shah, Which Information Was Revealed Consequent To Search Action Conducted On Jignesh Shah, The Case Of The Aadi Real Estate Developers Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito Ay : 2012-13 2

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 250Section 68

required documentary evidence to substantiate their claim before the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority. The appellant preferred the further appeal before the Tribunal, with a delay of 380 days i.e., beyond the period of limitation. By the order dated 19.10.2022, the Tribunal rejected the condonation of delay

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7, Pune vs. Mubea Automotive Components India Private Limited, Pune

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

ITA 694/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)

which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted the addition. 6. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) / NFAC, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 3 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Rajkamal Stone Metal Works, Ambegaon Khurd, Dist. Pune vs. ACIT Circle 5 Pune, Pune

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

ITA 691/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 2(47)Section 45Section 47

Appeal are partially answered in favour of the appellant.” 7. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: 1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(Appeals

Imperial Housing, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1792/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

grounds of appeal are decided in favour of the appellant.” 7. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) / NFAC, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law. Ld CIT(A) erred ... amend or alter any or all of the grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary. 8. The assessee has also filed the appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. Appellant contends that, since appellant's 'Return of Income’ was selected for "Limited Scrutiny"; addition of Rs.2

Anant Kashinath Kakatkar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Pune

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

ITA 1305/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri B.D. BhideFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

Thus, the appeal of appellant is dismissed. ” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Addl/JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the Addl/JCIT(A) in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. He submitted that

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Pune vs. Imperial Housing, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1120/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

grounds of appeal are decided in favour of the appellant.” 7. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) / NFAC, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law. Ld CIT(A) erred ... amend or alter any or all of the grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary. 8. The assessee has also filed the appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. Appellant contends that, since appellant's 'Return of Income’ was selected for "Limited Scrutiny"; addition of Rs.2

Abdul Irfan Abdul Ajij Sheikh, Wardha vs. ITO, Ward-2, Wardha

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

ITA 78/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Ms. Shrishti PandeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69A

deleted in toto.” 2. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out a delay of 20 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. While going through the record available before us, we find that the assessee has filed Affidavit in support of condonation of delay thereby ... view of the principles of natural justice and in accordance with law, we hereby condone the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and set 3 Abdul Irfan Abdul Ajij Sheikh ITA no.78/Nag./2024 aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) while restoring

Vnit Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 134/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)

learned Counsel, Shri Abhay Agrawal, Advocate, appearing for the assessee, pointed that there is a delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application–cum–Affidavit explaining the delay, the contents relevant thereto, are reproduced below:– “Sufficient Cause explaining the delay

Anand Govind Thatte, Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 127/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 270 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application explaining the cause of such delay which is supported by an Affidavit, the content of which are reproduced

Shri Prakash Jiwandas Wanjari, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur

In the result, we are of the considered view that the case on hand does not warrant levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act

ITA 232/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273ASection 80C

assessee before the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which allowed the assessee's appeal and while doing so, the Tribunal followed the decisions (i) of the Tribunal in the case of M.Raju

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Dolphin Hotels Private Limited, Ranga Reddy

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 204/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.165/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dolphin Hotels (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Anajpur Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaacd7740B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.204/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Vs. Dolphin Hotels (P) Asstt. C. I. T. Ltd Anajpur Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaacd7740B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

Hotels Pvt Ltd 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), both the assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground of appeal No.2 of assessee’s appeal and Ground No.1

Dolphin Hotels Private Limited, Anajpur vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 165/HYD/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.165/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dolphin Hotels (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Anajpur Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaacd7740B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.204/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Vs. Dolphin Hotels (P) Asstt. C. I. T. Ltd Anajpur Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaacd7740B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

Hotels Pvt Ltd 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), both the assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground of appeal No.2 of assessee’s appeal and Ground No.1

Sushmasri Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 58/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.57 & 58/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Smt. Sushmasri Boppana Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Pan:Akvpb6106D Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B. Balakrishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B. Balakrishna, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

thus, upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 9. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer

Sushmasri Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 57/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.57 & 58/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Smt. Sushmasri Boppana Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Pan:Akvpb6106D Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B. Balakrishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B. Balakrishna, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

thus, upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 9. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Asian Infra Estates LLP, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 685/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.683/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Dwellings Llp Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Abmfa1423A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.684 & 685/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Infra Estates Ltd Income Tax, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7660 & Central Circle 2(3) Hyderabad Asian Infra Estates Llp Hyderabad Pan:Abnf5143L (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B. Balakrishna, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These 3 Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Passed By The Learned

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B. Balakrishna, DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

terms of section 28(via) of the Act. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned DR Shri Srinath Sadanala, referring to the sale deed dated 30th June, 2017 between Asian Infra Estates Ltd and Shri Mahesh

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Asian Infra Estates Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 684/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.683/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Dwellings Llp Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Abmfa1423A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.684 & 685/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Infra Estates Ltd Income Tax, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7660 & Central Circle 2(3) Hyderabad Asian Infra Estates Llp Hyderabad Pan:Abnf5143L (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B. Balakrishna, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These 3 Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Passed By The Learned

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B. Balakrishna, DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

terms of section 28(via) of the Act. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned DR Shri Srinath Sadanala, referring to the sale deed dated 30th June, 2017 between Asian Infra Estates Ltd and Shri Mahesh

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Asian Dwellings LLP, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 683/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.683/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Dwellings Llp Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Abmfa1423A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.684 & 685/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Asian Infra Estates Ltd Income Tax, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7660 & Central Circle 2(3) Hyderabad Asian Infra Estates Llp Hyderabad Pan:Abnf5143L (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B. Balakrishna, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These 3 Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Passed By The Learned

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B. Balakrishna, DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

terms of section 28(via) of the Act. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned DR Shri Srinath Sadanala, referring to the sale deed dated 30th June, 2017 between Asian Infra Estates Ltd and Shri Mahesh

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Folium Trading Private Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 1271/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1271/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Folium Trading Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, Vs. Old No.42, 43, 44, Corporate Circle 1(1), New Door No.73, Chennai. Shop No.G8, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. Pan: Aaccf 4425B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1060106027 (1) Dated 25.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 19.12.2019. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That This Appeal Is Barred By Limitation By 28 Days & Revenue Has Filed Affidavit. The Facts Are That The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 25.01.2024 Was Received In The Office Of Pcit On 02.02.2024 & The Due Date Of Filing Of Appeal Before

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

genuine transactions and not otherwise. Assessee gets the relief and thus, the grounds of appeal are hereby allowed. Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The ld.Senior DR relied on the assessment order

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. J S Nihar Banu, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 445/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation of the delay explaining the cause for the delay ... No.26911 of 2019 in respect of a writ petition filed by M.Shajahan who was one of the respondents in the appeal before this tribunal. The impugned MA was adjudicated by the coordinate bench vide their order dated 10.04.2024 whereby the said order dated ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. J S Nihar Banu, Palakkad

ITA 444/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation of the delay explaining the cause for the delay ... No.26911 of 2019 in respect of a writ petition filed by M.Shajahan who was one of the respondents in the appeal before this tribunal. The impugned MA was adjudicated by the coordinate bench vide their order dated 10.04.2024 whereby the said order dated :- 8 -: ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019