← All Phrases

“miscellaneous application”

AppealsSection 254(2)Section 254(2)1,501 judgments

The decision most relied on for miscellaneous application is 254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (295 ITR 466), cited in 35 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on miscellaneous application

254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT
295 ITR 466 · 2007 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record that prejudices a party is rectifiable under section 254(2) of the Act.

CIT v. Birla Janahit Trust
208 ITR 372 · 1994 · High Court
17
citing judgments

Expenditure on salaries and miscellaneous expenses for carrying out the trust's objectives is considered an application of income for charitable purposes. Liabilities for employee benefits, such as gratuity and leave encashment, are accrued liabilities even if payable in the future.

Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Director, Health Services
10 SCC 136 · 2013 · Reported
12
citing judgments

A party can challenge the maintainability of an appeal, even if the delay in filing cross-objections is condoned due to bonafide reasons.

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India
238 CTR 353 · Supreme Court
10
citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that the provisions for obtaining approval from the Chief Commissioner of Customs and Excise (CoD) had outlived their utility, leading to the recall of previous orders that relied on such approvals.

CIT v. State Bank of Hyderabad
382 ITR 499 · 2016 · Reported
10
citing judgments

A Tribunal order recalling an earlier order that was dismissed for want of condonation of delay approval is interlocutory and does not adjudicate on merits.

Judgments citing miscellaneous application

Biswanath Hosiery Mills Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 469/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

oppose. 3. Hence, we are dismissing the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Dr Balabhai Nanavati Hospital, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 5718/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhshri Girish Agrawal

Section 11Section 12ASection 254(1)Section 80G(5)

departmental representative (Sr. DR) for submits that if the appeals of the revenue are being dismissed, he may be given liberty to move appropriate miscellaneous application (MA) for recalling the order, if at later stage it is discovered that the case of revenue is covered by any exception clause

DCIT CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 5717/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhshri Girish Agrawal

Section 11Section 12ASection 254(1)Section 80G(5)

departmental representative (Sr. DR) for submits that if the appeals of the revenue are being dismissed, he may be given liberty to move appropriate miscellaneous application (MA) for recalling the order, if at later stage it is discovered that the case of revenue is covered by any exception clause

Kalyan, V. Nagar, Purulia vs. It(Exemptions), 10B, Middleton Row (6Th Floor)

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

ITA 1980/KOL/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 May 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(vi)

permanent registration filed u/s 12AB of the Act and in accordance with law after giving necessary opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Miscellaneous Application filed against the order of the Tribunal was rejected vide order dated 22.07.2022. ix) The assessee filed an application for registration or approval under

Atotech India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 6571/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalatotech India Private Dy. Cit, Limited, Circle-1(1), 66 Km Stone, Nh-8, Delhi Vs. Gurgaon. Jaipur Highway, Gurgaon. (Appellant) (Respondent)

6571/Del/16 in terms of the order passed on 11.05.2018 has allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. Thereafter, the assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA) seeking rectification of the said order. In the said MA, assessee has stated that grounds of appeal No. 4 and sub grounds taken

Lataben Kanaiyalal Kothwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward -3(2)(6), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 903/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.903/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Lataben Kanaiyalal Kothwala Vs. Income Tax Officer, Surat B-10, J K Nagar, Puna, Kumbharia Road, Dumbhal- 395010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adtpk8783C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kiran K Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 03.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.04.2025

Section 250

assessee under DTVSV,2024 does not get finally settled for any reason whatsoever, then both the parties are at liberty to prefer Miscellaneous Application before this Tribunal for restoration of the appeal or any further direction and in such event, the appeal shall get restored. The Assessing Officer is directed

DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Anurag Dalmia, New Delhi

In the result, miscellaneous application of the Revenue is

ITA 6538/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshma No. 140/Del/2020 (In I.T.A No.6538/Del/2017) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम Dcit, Anurag Dalmia, 2Nd Floor, Indraprakash Building-21, Central Circle-26, Vs. Room No.323, Ara Centre, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Shri Vinod Bindal, CA & Ms. Rinky Sharma, ITP MA.No.140/Del/2020 & ITA No.6538/Del/2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. Through this miscellaneous application the Revenue stated that appeal of the Revenue was dismissed on account of tax effect following the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated ... HSBC) and therefore the case of the Revenue will fall under exception clause (d) provided in CBDT Circular 3/2018 dated 20.08.2018. Thus, allowing the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue, we recall the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.6538/Del/2017 dated 23.08.2019. 4. Coming to the merits of the addition

Income Tax Officer-Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1495/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

merits. 13. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any shall stand closed.” ITA No. 1158, 1493 & 1495/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18) Kohinoor Planet Constructions

Income Tax Officer Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1493/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

merits. 13. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any shall stand closed.” ITA No. 1158, 1493 & 1495/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18) Kohinoor Planet Constructions

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1159/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

merits. 13. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any shall stand closed.” ITA No. 1158, 1493 & 1495/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18) Kohinoor Planet Constructions

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1158/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

merits. 13. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any shall stand closed.” ITA No. 1158, 1493 & 1495/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18) Kohinoor Planet Constructions

Mahinder M Kohli, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not withdrawn

ITA 406/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 406/Pun/2017 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vs Ito Ward-9(2), Mahinder M. Kohli, Prop. Nr Enterprises, Pune 108 Vidya Villa, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Dehu Road Pune-412101 Maharashtra Pan-Afrpk3400J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rishi V LodhaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

case the assessee’s application under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme is not accepted then the assessee would be at liberty to file the miscellaneous application for re-calling of this order within the prescribed time limit provided under the Act. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Kanchan Devi Baheti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 43(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 817/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 817/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Kanchan Devi Baheti,…….…………...…………Appellant 1St Floor, C/O. Mohanlal Manoj Kumar, 28, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Ahkpb3079R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….…………...Respondent Ward-43(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Tarak Nath Jaiswal, A.R. & Shri Ashay Singiska, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: April 25, 2025 O R D E R

case, I dismiss the appeal of the assessee with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Vijay Mittal, Vizac, A.P vs. D.C.I.T., Cir - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as

ITA 2403/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 91(2)Section 91(3)Section 92(2)

withdrawn. However, if the subsequent facts warrant that the appeal should be heard on merits, the assessee shall be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application for restoration of the appeal. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open

ITO Ward - 10(4), New Delhi vs. Ghp Buildcon Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as above

ITA 2622/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 2622/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 2623/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7981/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 C & S Electric Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Income Tax, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Vs. Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 2532/Del/2018, A.Y.2013-14 Ita No. 2533/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Ita No. 8274/Del/2018, A.Y.2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of C & S Electric Limited Income Tax, (Formerly Controls & Circle-1, Ltu, Vs. Switchgear Co. Ltd.) New Delhi 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Bhalla, Ca Respondent By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025 Order Per Bench Cross Appeal By The Assessee & Revenue Containing Common Facts Were Heard Together Being Inter-Connected With Each Other & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. Ita No.2532, 2533 & 8274/Del/2018 C & S Electric Ltd. 2. These Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against Orders Dated 10.01.18 & 25.09.2018 Respectively Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

Section 10ASection 14ASection 80Section 80I

maintainable as per the CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024. Hence, these appeals stand dismissed accordingly. However, the Revenue has full liberty to file Miscellaneous Applications (‘MA’), within stipulated time period, if tax effect in any of these cases is found above the threshold limit. Assessee’s appeal; ITA No.2622/Del/2018

Azam Ali Khan, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 11(1), Pmt Building Shankarseth Road

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1071/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1071/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Azam Ali Khan, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.8, Giriel – B.S.No.68, S Ward-11(1), Pune. Utopia Society, Wanori, Pune – 411040.Maharashtra. Pan: Aidpk2273N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 250

case, the ITA No.1071/PUN/2023 for A.Y.2016-17 was heard on 27.02.2024 ex-parte. The order was passed on 27.02.2024. ITA No.1071/PUN/2023[A] The assessee filed Miscellaneous Application against the order in ITA No.1071/Pun/2023, MA No.18/PUN/2024 and MA No.26/PUN/2024. The said MA was allowed vide order dated 18.02.2025 recalling the ex-parte

Assistant Commissioner Income of Tax, Kolkata vs. S.R.Timber Products Private Limited, Howrah

In the result, all the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 958/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm S.R. Timber Products Private Acit Limited Abp, Dtrti Building 110 Shanti 268 Narayani Complex Gt Road Pally Em Bypass, Kolkata, Vs. Liluah, Howrah, West Bengal, 700107 West Bengal, 711204 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagcs3662P Assessee By : Shri Ankit Jalan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sailen Samadder, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jalan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR

appeal or this case falls in any of the exceptions provided in the instruction, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application for revival of this appeal. Such application should be filed within the time limit provided in the Act. 04. In the result

Shree Balajee Agro Mills Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Ward 5(1) Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1293/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Rakesh Mishra]

oppose. 3. Hence, we are dismissing the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

Baijnath Prasad, Patna vs. ITO, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 409/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 91

case, I dismiss the appeal of the assessee with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. 2 Baijnath Prasad 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

M/S. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT, CPC, Bangalore Present Juridiction the Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 68/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 68/Ahd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Checkmate Services Vs. Pvt. Ltd. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower, Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Vadodara, Gujarat - 390002 बनाम / The Dy.Cit Cpc, Bangalore Present Jurisdiction The Dy.Cit, Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacc8465A (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलार्थी ओर से /Appellant By : Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/04/2025 Order Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Was Originally Decided Vide Order Ita No.68/Ahd/2023 Dated 20.05.2024 & The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed. Thereafter, The Assessee Had Filed A Miscellaneous Application On The Ground That Additional Legal Ground Taken By The Assessee Were Omitted To Be Adjudicated. The Miscellaneous Application Was Decided Vide Order Ma No. 121/Ahd/2024 (In

For Appellant: Shri M. R. Sahu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

appeal was originally decided vide order ITA No.68/Ahd/2023 dated 20.05.2024 and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Thereafter, the assessee had filed a Miscellaneous Application on the ground that additional legal ground taken by the assessee were omitted to be adjudicated. The Miscellaneous Application was decided vide order