← 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

The Indupalli Primary Agriculture Co Operative Credit Society Ltd, Unduturu Mandalam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudiwada

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 88/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.88/Viz/2024 & 89/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2020-21) The Indupalli Primary Agriculture Vs. Income Tax Officer Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Ward-1 No.Kr356 Dno.5-46, Indupalli Village Gudiwada Indupalli Post Unguturu Mandalam Krishna [Pan : Aacat9205B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 8P(2)(a)

Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. The order passed by the assessment unit NFAC u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act dt.06.09.2022

Indira Pasupuleti, Palakollu vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Kakinada

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

ITA 8/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.08/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Indira Pasupuleti, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Palakollu. International Taxation, Pan: Gfjpp 5413 L Kakinada. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

draft assessment order as directed by the Ld. DRP. Aggrieved by the said order of the Ld. AO, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders passed under section 147 r.w.s

Chodisetty Hemashankar, Tuni vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tuni

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 74/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.74/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Chodisetty Hemashankar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Akupc 0617 K Tuni. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

admission and hence, the appeal is not admitted. ………….” 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: 4 “1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also

Ramya Vadlamudi, Gudiwada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gudiwada

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

ITA 72/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.72/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Ramya Vadlamudi Vs. Income Tax Officer 10-154, Opp. E-Seva Ward-2 Rajendra Nagar Gudiwada Gudiwada, Krishna Dist. [Pan : Ajnpv4972A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

appeal by the assessee, despite giving multiple opportunities. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal : 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have considered the facts

Apparao Mutchakarla, Vizag vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vizag

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 4/VIZ/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.04/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Apparao Mutchakarla, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Vizag. Income Tax, Pan: Ahvpm 9813 F Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drawn our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with petition seeking ... beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 38 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that

Srinivas Balla, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 11/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.11/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Srinivas Balla, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Pan: Ahipb 8232 A Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Villuri Aparna, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Villuri Aparna, Sr. AR
Section 127Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drawn my attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with petition seeking ... beyond the prescribed limit with a delay of 11 days. Therefore, I hereby condone the delay of 11 days in filing the 3 appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that

Venkatanarayana Peetha, Godavarru vs. Income Tax Officer, Tenali

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

ITA 309/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.309/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Venkatanarayana Peetha Vs. Income Tax Officer House No.4-41, Godavarru Village Ward-1 Duggirala Mandalam Tenali Guntur [Pan : Byspp4577L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 143(3)Section 69A

appeal by the assessee, despite giving multiple opportunities. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, filed a petition and pleaded to substitute the original grounds raised with the revised grounds as follows : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner

Vellanki Bala Bhaskar Rao, Eluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Eluru

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

ITA 293/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.293/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Vellanki Bala Bhaskar Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Flat No.A5, Harsha Palace Ward-2 Tikkanna Somayajulu Street Eluru Ashok Nagar, Eluru [Pan : Alopb3230C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.Madhusudan, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

filed by the assessee ex-parte due to non prosecution. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal : i. The order under Sec.250 dt.30.09.2023 passed by the Ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi may be erroneous

Suryanarayana Reddy Tondapu, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kakinada

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

ITA 170/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.170/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Suryanarayana Reddy Tondapu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kakinada. Ward-1, Pan: Adppt 6393 K Kakinada. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Dl Narasimha Rao, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri DL Narasimha Rao, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 187(1)Section 197Section 250Section 4Section 69

outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drawn my attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with petition seeking ... appeal beyond the prescribed limit with a delay of 38 days. Therefore, I hereby condone the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that

Mudu Gopa Raju, Prop Royal Wines, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudivada

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

ITA 133/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.133/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Mudu Gopa Raju Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop. Royal Wines Ward-1 2-78, Sivalayam Veedhi Gudivada Tempalli, Krishna Dist. [Pan : Boypg1989P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 679ASection 69Section 69A

appeal by the assessee, despite giving multiple opportunities. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal : 1. The Order of the learned CIT(Appeals) is erroneous on facts of the case

Sunshine Foods & Beverages, Solapur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.498/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: None
Section 115BSection 133A

appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 3 4. When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service

Arthwell Nagari Sahakari Patsantha Limited, Beed vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Beed

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

ITA 493/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.493/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Shubham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

short ‘NFAC) had not condoned the delay by holding that ignorance of law is no excuse. 4. Being aggrieved the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 3 5. The ld. Authorised Representative submits that the ld. NFAC ought to have condoned the delay as there

Mhasimata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Limited Nizampur, Dhule vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Dhule

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

ITA 490/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.490/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Hemant C. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 56Section 80P

addition. Later on, when the appellant approached the concerned Chartered Accountant, who after going through the impugned order, 2 suggested to file an appeal before the Tribunal and hence the delay occurred. It is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned. I have gone through the contents ... before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. 5. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 6. I heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an admitted position that

Shri Santaji Maharaj Nagari Sahkari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Yeola, Nashik vs. CIT (Appeals), Nashik

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

ITA 115/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.115/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 142(1)Section 144

onus lying upon him by filing the explanation in support of the source of the cash deposit. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 4. The ld. Authorised Representative submits before me that the appellant has filed a detailed explanation in support

Hiranand Chandiram Bajaj, Jalgaon vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 1440/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1440/Pun/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)

holding that the appellant had failed to explain the sudden rise in the cash. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 4. The ld. Authorised Representative submits that before the CIT(A) the appellant filed an explanation for the source of the cash

Sanjay Kumar Tingrikar, Hyderabad vs. JCIT., Rang-7, Hyderabad

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

ITA 183/HYD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.183/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Kumar Vs. Jt. Cit, Range-7 Tingrikar, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppt8912F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav Dr Appeared For Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/04/2024

For Appellant: Advocate S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav DR appeared for Smt. Sheetal
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271Section 271D

appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 3. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee ex- parte

Medisetty Venkata Rattaiah, Vijayawada vs. The Assistant Or Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada

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

ITA 94/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.94/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2017-18) Medisetty Venkata Rattaiah, Vs. The Assistant Or Deputy Vijayawada. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan: Abypm 1595 M Vijayawada. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 15 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the assessee filed an affidavit along with a petition seeking condonation of delay and the contents ... appeal beyond the prescribed limit with a delay of 15 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 15 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that

Kodali Suresh Babu, Labbipet vs. Income Tax Officer Ward (International Taxation), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/VIZ/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T. (It). A. No.231/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2016-17) Kodali Suresh Babu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Labbipet. Ward (International Taxation), Pan: Atwpk 8835 C Vijayawada. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 18/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

adjudicated the legal ground raised by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable

Mjunction Services Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as indicated above

ITA 203/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ashis Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

passes an order on the pending appeal against the order u/s. 143(3), which remains to be decided/adjudicated upon as the appeal before the Tribunal can be filed only against an order u/s. 250 of the Act by the Ld. CIT(A). Since the grounds of appeal pertain ... pending appeal and, thereafter, if aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it shall be at liberty to file the appeal before the Tribunal. Accordingly, as held in para 2 (supra) the application for condonation of delay is also not adjudicated upon being infructuous/premature in nature. The appeal

Kalyanasundaram Bharath Hari, Chittlapakkam, Chennai vs. ITO, Int. Tax Ward 1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 307/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 50CSection 54

finds no infirmity in the action of the AO and hence the objection of the assessee is rejected. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee Shri Arjun Raj, Advocate appeared and drew our attention to assessee’s paper-book consisting