← 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

M/S Chemester Food Industry, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-III, Amritsar

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

ITA 583/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)

very reasonable, because during last year for the same business was 13.21%. The appeal is dismissed.” 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds relate thereto. 6. At the very outset the Ld. AR pointed out that the assessee has filed the additional evidence

Shashikant Chhotubhai Tania, L/H of Hemendra Shashikant Tania, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(4), Surat

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 42/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Shashikant Chhotubhai Tania, I.T.O., L/H-Hemendra Shashikant Tania, Ward 1(2)(4), Vs. 8/652A, Bharwad Falia, Navsari Surat. Bazar, Surat. Pan No. Aajpt 9963 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)

Section 144 of the Act and the Assessing officer was justified in levying the penalty. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3 Shashikant Chhotubhai Tania Vs ITO 5. The registry has recorded that there is delay of one day in filing appeal before

Tarit F. Das, Bharuch vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir.1, Bharuch

In the result this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 105/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Tarit F Das, A.C.I.T., Aaa-49, Shreeji Sadan Bungalows, Circle-1, Vs. Swaminarayan Mandir Road, Bharuch. Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch. Pan No. Acgpd 8543 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)

14/07/2020, however, the present appeal is filed before the Tribunal on 02/06/2021. Thus, there is delay of 275 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with affidavit of assessee. The learned Authorised Representative ... submits that the assessee filed the present appeal within grace period. There was no intentional or deliberate delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal rather it is due to reason beyond his control. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue

ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fauji Exim Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3661/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

sustainable and it is hereby deleted.” 5. Dissatisfied, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and reiterated the submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A) in support of the assessee’s case. On the contrary

Conplex Telecom India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1951/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 271(1)(c)

directed the Ld. AO to give credit for TDS after due verification and in accordance with law. 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue(s) of sustaining rejection of books of account under section ... facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case, we decline to condone the inordinate delay of 121 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. 13. In its application of condonation of impugned delay the assessee has also urged for providing fair, meaningful and proper opportunity to establish that the orders

Atulkumar Babulal Modi, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bharuch

In the result, this appeal of this assessee is dismissed

ITA 89/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Atulkumar Babulal Modi, I.T.O., A-61, Link Complex, Link Road, Ward 1(2), Vs. Bharuch-392001. Bharuch. Pan No. Acwpm 4256 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 274Section 50C

granting opportunity and upheld the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. I have heard the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee and the learned Senior Departmental Representative

M/S Assoteoch Supertech Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. ITO, Noida

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 492/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Assotech Supertech Ito Joint, Venture, 1114, Vs Ward- I Hemkunt Chanber, 89, Noida Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan No.Aaajai382K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271

remit it back to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to first verify the status of the appeal before the Tribunal and then decide the appeal afresh after giving a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider the facts afresh

Ansal Crown Infrabuild Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3303/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Akash Deepak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

correctly disallowed. Therefore, I am in agreement with AO and the disallowance of Rs.15,32,063/- is sustained.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival submissions on the issue. The correctness of addition on account of depreciation claimed in the Profit

Balraj Wine, Shri Muktsar Sahib vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incoe Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

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

ITA 10/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 272A

been provided a copy of the appellate order of CIT(A) through email dated 21.01.2023 to enable the appellant to file the appeal before the Tribunal with the self declaration of the partner. The ld. Addl. CIT-DR has no objection to the request of the counsel for condonation

Yadla Srinivasa Rao, Vijayawada vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 78/VIZ/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.78/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Yadla Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.20-04-190/7A Ward-3(2) Basavataraka Nagar Vijayawada Ayodhya Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Abfpy5447F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.Madhusudan, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 50C

Yadla Srinivasa Rao, Vijayawada written submissions of the assessee, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee pleaded to replace the grounds raised along with Form No.36 with the revised grounds as under, as they are repetitive

Nasim Vazir Shaikh, Sanjan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Vapi

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

ITA 78/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 254(1)

hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there is delay of about 80 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed his affidavit ITA No.77 &78/Srt/2023 Nasim Vazir Shaikh Vs ITO for seeking condonation of delay ... Shri Priyesh Ghetia of G B Laddha & Co at Vapi. After discussing the matter with him, he advised the assessee to file appeal before the Tribunal at Surat. For filing of appeal before the Tribunal at Surat, the assessee contacted me (Suresh Kabra, CA). As per discussion, the appeal fees

Nasim Vazir Shaikh, Sanjan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Vapi

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

ITA 77/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 254(1)

hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there is delay of about 80 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed his affidavit ITA No.77 &78/Srt/2023 Nasim Vazir Shaikh Vs ITO for seeking condonation of delay ... Shri Priyesh Ghetia of G B Laddha & Co at Vapi. After discussing the matter with him, he advised the assessee to file appeal before the Tribunal at Surat. For filing of appeal before the Tribunal at Surat, the assessee contacted me (Suresh Kabra, CA). As per discussion, the appeal fees

Sai Petroleum, Surat vs. Pr.CIT, -1, Surat

In the result, grounds no

ITA 116/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.116/Srt/2022 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Sai Petroleum Principal Commissioner Of 381, Survey No.415, Sachin, Income-Tax-1, Rom 123, Vs Surat-394230 Aayakhar Bhawan, Majura Pan No: Achfs 8318 Q Gate, Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Ketan S. Jagirdar, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 16.03.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 17.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 15.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(4), Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 27.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1) The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming Ads Made By Ld. Ao As Per Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act. Sai Petroleum I. Addition U/S 68 R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act Amounting To Rs.13,65,241 As Unreconciled Cash Deposited In Bank Accounted As Cash Sales During Demonetization Period. Ii. Addition U/S 68 Of The Act Amounting To Rs.10,00,000 Received From Debtors As Unaccounted Cash Deposited In Bank During Demonetization Period.

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

Transport Udhna and Swastik Logistics Udhna was introduced as unaccounted income in the assessees books of account. Further, aggrieved the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 10. I have heard the submission of Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee and learned Senior 9 Sai Petroleum Departmental Representative

DCIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd,B- Central Circle-15, 393, Zakir Nagar So, South East Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi-1100025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

held that the initiations of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are not valid in law. Hence, the revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. 11A. Heard, the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We have perused the order

Deepak Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-33(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7348/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Deepak Kumar, Vs Ito, C/O-R S Chauhan & Co., Ward-33(5), A-1/59, Lgf, Freedom Fighter New Delhi. Enclave, Ignou Road, Neb Sarai, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aagpk5795A Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023

Section 148

after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Apropos to Grounds of appeal, Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. I have heard

Diya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated herein above

ITA 1929/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Diya Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 1373, Rani Bagh, Shakur Ward-7(3), Basti, Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aaccd3991L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

submissions, sustained the addition and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ground of appeal Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee are against the validity of the re-opening of the assessment

Samyukta Health &Academic Society, Anakapalle vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 232/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.232/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Samyukta Health & Academic Society Vs. Income Tax Officer Ramalayam Street Exemption Ward Gandhi Nagar Visakhapatnam Anakapalle [Pan : Aagts9608E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 154

dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable

Dollars Colony Phase-1, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 220/VIZ/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.218-220/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 To2020-21) M/S Dollars Colony Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Income Tax Krishna Nagar, Venkateswarapuram Central Circle-2 Vijayawada Rajahmundry [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022 & 177/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19& 2019-20) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Dollars Colony Central Circle-2 Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Rajahmundry Krishna Nagar Venkateswarapuram Vijayawada [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 21.02.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153C

after considering the submissions made by the assessee, estimated the profit on unaccounted sales @12.5%. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. The learned CIT(Appeals) is erred in facts and law while passing the order. 2. The Learned ... allowed. We direct the AO to delete the additions made in the hands of assessee AOP. I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022, A.Y.2018-19 7. The revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal on 16.09.2022, since, the Ld.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had issued authorisation in view of the tax effect reported at Rs.52

Dollars Colony Phase-1, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 219/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.218-220/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 To2020-21) M/S Dollars Colony Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Income Tax Krishna Nagar, Venkateswarapuram Central Circle-2 Vijayawada Rajahmundry [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022 & 177/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19& 2019-20) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Dollars Colony Central Circle-2 Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Rajahmundry Krishna Nagar Venkateswarapuram Vijayawada [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 21.02.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153C

after considering the submissions made by the assessee, estimated the profit on unaccounted sales @12.5%. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. The learned CIT(Appeals) is erred in facts and law while passing the order. 2. The Learned ... allowed. We direct the AO to delete the additions made in the hands of assessee AOP. I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022, A.Y.2018-19 7. The revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal on 16.09.2022, since, the Ld.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had issued authorisation in view of the tax effect reported at Rs.52

Dollars Colony Phase-1, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 218/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.218-220/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 To2020-21) M/S Dollars Colony Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Income Tax Krishna Nagar, Venkateswarapuram Central Circle-2 Vijayawada Rajahmundry [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022 & 177/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19& 2019-20) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Dollars Colony Central Circle-2 Phase-1, D.No.40-3/1-46 Rajahmundry Krishna Nagar Venkateswarapuram Vijayawada [Pan : Aacad6957E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 21.02.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153C

after considering the submissions made by the assessee, estimated the profit on unaccounted sales @12.5%. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. The learned CIT(Appeals) is erred in facts and law while passing the order. 2. The Learned ... allowed. We direct the AO to delete the additions made in the hands of assessee AOP. I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2022, A.Y.2018-19 7. The revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal on 16.09.2022, since, the Ld.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had issued authorisation in view of the tax effect reported at Rs.52