“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

Viswanathan Securities P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Mehra, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 292B

shifting of profit by using client code modification. 6. Aggrieved by the denial of any relief by the CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. I.T.A. No.135/Del/2019 7 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the first appellate order and the assessment order. We have also

Sh. Yogendra Kumar, Kherali Pichnot, Khareda, Via-Malakhera, Alwar vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Alwar

ITA 341/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Cit (A) Through Ca Rajesh Bhagwan On 17.12.2018. In Form No. 35 My Address Along With The Mobile No. Is Given & E-Mail Id Of My Ca Rajesh Bhagwan Is Given At Which The Notice Of Hearing May Be Sent.

For Appellant: Shri PC Parwal (CA)For Respondent: SMs Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 148Section 250

affidavit, we are satisfied that the assessee was having a reasonable cause for delay of 34 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay of 34 days in filing the appeal ... being out of past savings and thus, confirmed addition of Rs.13,80,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds :- 1. The ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal

Ritika Gupta, 3/273, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-4(2), Jaipur, Ward-4(2)

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

ITA 551/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hearing.

For Appellant: Ms. Shivangi Samdhani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 253(3)

took a couple of days in transferring the case file of the assessee to the present Chartered Accountant and preparation of filing the appeal before the Tribunal. As per provisions of section 253(3) of the IT Act, 1961, the appeal was due to be filed in the Office ... filed on 19.04.2019 with a delay of 2 days. The assessee, thus, submitted that there was no willful delay in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal but the delay caused due to situation beyond the control of the assessee. She therefore, requested to condone the delay of 2 days

ACIT, Circle-28(1), New Delhi vs. Anju Jain, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7623/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CA

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68

terms of reasoning quoted above. 7. Aggrieved by the relief granted by the CIT(A), the Revenue has presented the captioned appeal before the Tribunal. 8. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. DR for the Revenue broadly reiterated the observations made in the assessment order

Paramjeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6222/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

assessee though the Revenue was represented by the Ld. DR on all the above dates fixed for hearing. The defect in filing appeal before the Tribunal has not been removed so far by filing separate appeal for each of the seven assessment years (AY 2011-12 to 2017-18) involved

Serco India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1187/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

well as the increase in the sundry creditors during the year. 9. Further aggrieved by the denial of any relief, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 10. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel submitted that two main issues are involved for adjudication

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd., Lucknow

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2358/DEL/2009[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasahara India Financial Corp Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1-Kapoorthala Complex, Central Circle-I, Aliganj, Lucknow Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs8698C

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 68

reassessment proceedings the additions on the same ground were made which was set aside by the ld First Appellate Authority and revenue’s appeal before the Tribunal was dismissed and once the reassessment on same ground was examined on merits, reopening on the same ground is beyond jurisdiction

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd., Lucknow

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2357/DEL/2009[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasahara India Financial Corp Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1-Kapoorthala Complex, Central Circle-I, Aliganj, Lucknow Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs8698C

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 68

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd., Lucknow

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2356/DEL/2009[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasahara India Financial Corp Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1-Kapoorthala Complex, Central Circle-I, Aliganj, Lucknow Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs8698C

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 68

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd., Lucknow

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2355/DEL/2009[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasahara India Financial Corp Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1-Kapoorthala Complex, Central Circle-I, Aliganj, Lucknow Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs8698C

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 68

Sahara India Financial Corp. Limited, Lucknow vs. DCIT, Lucknow

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2339/DEL/2009[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasahara India Financial Corp Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1-Kapoorthala Complex, Central Circle-I, Aliganj, Lucknow Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs8698C

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 68

Bhaskara Rao Gudla, Srikakulam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Srikakulam

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

ITA 224/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.224/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Bhaskara Rao Gudla Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.10-05-42 Ward-1 Prakash Building Srikakulam Kaling Road Market Street Srikakulam [Pan : Ahrpg2923Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmaniam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasad Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/ 1046187321(1) Dated 06.10.2022 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015- 16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual, Engaged In The Business Of Vegetable Trading, Whereby, He Procures Vegetables

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmaniam, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasad Rao, DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250

I.T.A. No.224/Viz/2022, A.Y. 2015-16 Bhaskara Rao Gudla, Srikakulam 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds : 1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the orders passed under the provisions of section

Samrajyam Kondru, Krishna District vs. JCIT, Range-1, Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 183/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.183/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Samrajyam Kondru Vs. Jcit, Range-1 20-130 Tb Road Vijayawada Ramannapeta Bus Stop Nandigama Post & Mandal Krishna Dist [Pan : Bfmpk8467H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Rajendra Prasad Talluri, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Sankar Pandi, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.01.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2023

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Prasad TalluriFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

appeal of the assessee, relying on various judicial precedents. 4. On being aggrieved with the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. The Ld.CIT-A erred in law and facts and circumstances of the case in confirming

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Datla Shanti, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 33/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao

Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54F

transferrable asset and hence allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts

Vizinanagaram Rotary Parvati Devi Anchalia Voluntary Blood Bank Trust, Vizianagaram vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 618/VIZ/2019[2019-20 and FY (2018-19)]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.617/Viz/2019 & 618/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Vizianagaram Rotary Parvati Devi Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Anchalia Voluntary Blood Bank Trust (Exemptions) C/O Balaji Associates Hyderabad 19-6-1/3, Ag Road Vizianagaram [Pan : Aactv7569D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16 .02.2023

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik

Section 12ASection 80G

assessee’s application for registration u/s 12A which is mandatory for granting approval u/s 80G. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds : 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) ought not to have rejected the application under Form

Vizinanagaram Rotary Parvati Devi Anchalia Voluntary Blood Bank Trust, Vizianagaram vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 617/VIZ/2019[2019-20 and FY (2018-19)]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik

Section 12ASection 80G

Perfect Press Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 19(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 6239/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR

Section 50CSection 50C(2)

assessee. 4.2 The appeal of the assessee on this issue before the Ld. CIT(A) was not successful. Hence the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and Ground No. 1 and 2 relate thereto. 5. On perusal of details filed by the assessee, the Ld. AO found that ... discretion of the Ld. AO to refer or not to refer to DVO for valuation. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and Ground No. 3, 4 and 5 relate thereto. 6. Hearing was fixed for 14.06.2022, 23.11.2022 and 08.08.2022 but none appeared for and/or on behalf

Reliant Healthcare Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Circle-21(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 4882/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalty order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the impugned penalty against which the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Hearing was fixed on 07.06.2022, 17.11.2022, 23.11.2022 and finally on 08.02.2023. None appeared for and / or on behalf of the assessee. The Revenue

Virender Singh Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 2(5), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3600/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

have not been met, the appellant is not entitled to any relief. Therefore, the appeal is rejected. ” 5. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds relate thereto. 6. The appeal to the Tribunal was found to have been filed late by 1193 days which ... attended for the assessee whereas the Revenue was represented by the Ld. DR on all the above dates. 8. As stated earlier, the appeal to the Tribunal has been filed late by 1193 days. We have gone through the application for condonation of delay of 1193 days which has been

Shri Altaf Husain Shah, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Srinagar

ITA 13/ASR/2021[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Feb 2023AY 2001-02

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

For Appellant: Sh. Nazia Wani, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 253Section 3

from 15.03.2020 to 14.03.2021. In view of the application of order of the Supreme Court the petitioner has yet two months to file appeal before the Tribunal. 04. In view of the above, we dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file appeal before the Appellate