← All Phrases

“Section 251(1)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)1,012 judgments

RANJANA DEVI,MAUR MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 410/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjana Devi, C/O Jishu Trading Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Co. Maur Mandi, Punjab. Bathinda. [Pan:-Alzpd4607L] (Appellant) (Respondent) None. Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A

decision I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 1 Assessment Year: 2017-18 0 on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance ... dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise

S.S. INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 817/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 816 & 817/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) S.S. Industries, Plot No.610, 611, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 620, 621, Urla Industrial Area, Village- Tax, Central Circle 1, Raipur, Central Accholi, Distt.-Raipur, C.G.-492003 Revenue Building, Raipur, C. G. Pan: Aclfs9015L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Raghunath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 20/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 69C

writing with well-reasoned order on each point of determination arisen for his consideration. 7. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his mind

S.S. INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 816/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 816 & 817/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) S.S. Industries, Plot No.610, 611, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 620, 621, Urla Industrial Area, Village- Tax, Central Circle 1, Raipur, Central Accholi, Distt.-Raipur, C.G.-492003 Revenue Building, Raipur, C. G. Pan: Aclfs9015L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Raghunath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 20/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 69C

writing with well-reasoned order on each point of determination arisen for his consideration. 7. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his mind

ITO, LUDHIANA vs. ARUN GUPTA, LUDHIANA

ITA 112/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.112/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ito Arun Gupta बनाम/ Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar 1698 – New Shakti Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab - 141001 Ludhiana, Punjab - 141001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abkpg-4933-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. B.M. Monga & Sh. Rohit Kaura (Advocates) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Manav Bansal (Cit) Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-01-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 19-03-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Krinwant Sahay () This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 04.12.2024, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Setting Aside The Assessment Order To The File Of The Assessing Officer For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Sh. B.M. Monga & Sh. Rohit Kaura (Advocates)For Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 251Section 68Section 69C

Representative (AR) for the assessee supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A), stating that the restoration of the power to remand under Section 251(1)(a) was specifically intended for cases where the merits could not be examined due to lack of representation at the lower level, and that ... remand a matter back to the AO. It is observed that the Finance Act, 2024, reintroduced the provision under Section 251(1)(a) enabling the CIT(A) to set aside an assessment and refer it back for fresh adjudication, effective from October 1, 2024. In the present case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. SHRI. SOMANUR RAMASWAMY BHOOPATHY, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 4133/CHNY/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.:4133/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Shri. Somanur Ramaswamy Corporate Circle – 1, Vs. Bhoopathy, Coimbatore. 21, New Lorry Stand, South Ukkadam, Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan:Adopb-4129-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Aroon Praasad, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. Gokul Raj, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Dated 28.10.2025, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year (A.Y) 2016-17 Against The Order U/S.147 R.W.S.144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The Ao, Nfac, Delhi Dated 13.03.2024. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Hiring Passenger Vehicles. The Assessee Had Not Filed His Return Of Income For A.Y.2016-17 As Per Section 139 Of The Act. Based On The Information

For Appellant: Mr. Aroon Praasad, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. Gokul Raj, Advocate
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

best judgement assessment order and hence the ld.CIT(A) has set aside the assessment order and in accordance with proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act remitted the file to the Assessing Officer to frame the assessment afresh. Aggrieved by the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT ... assessee, has set aside the order and remitted to the Assessing Officer for framing the assessment denovo in accordance with proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) and hence we dismiss the appeal

PRAVEEN SANJIV,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-7(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3834/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3834/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Praveen Sanjiv, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 45, W Block, 7Th Street, Anna Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Nagar, Chennai 600 040. Chennai. [Pan: Fzzps0216R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.12.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Ground No. 1 Raised By The Assessee Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

verification of details filed by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer under section 251(1)(a) of the Act. As aggrieved by the said order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

MEGA AUTOMOBILES PVT LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 988/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Jay Uke, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 251(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)

subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in setting aside the matter to the file of AO by contravening the provisions of Section 251(1)(a). 4. It is therefore prayed that above additions/disallowances made by the assessing officer and confirmed by learned CIT(A) may please be deleted

M/S. CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERSW,BARAZULA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 712/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. M. A. Mir, Cost Accountant
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (PHYSICAL COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT

M/S. CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERS,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 600/ASR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. M. A. Mir, Cost Accountant
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (PHYSICAL COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT

SHRI DURDUNDESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NYT,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita No. 306 To 307 & 311/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Durdundeshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamita Subhash Road, Sankeshwar Belagavi-591313 Pan:Aaaas5612D . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Rijula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 270ASection 80PSection 80P(2)

note that, while dealing with the first appeal filed u/s 246A of the Act, the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act mandates the Ld. NFAC to cease the first appeal conclusively either ‘confirming or reducing or enhancing or annulling’ the assessment. Further while doing

SHRI DURDUNDESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NYT,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 307/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita No. 306 To 307 & 311/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Durdundeshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamita Subhash Road, Sankeshwar Belagavi-591313 Pan:Aaaas5612D . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Rijula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 270ASection 80PSection 80P(2)

note that, while dealing with the first appeal filed u/s 246A of the Act, the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act mandates the Ld. NFAC to cease the first appeal conclusively either ‘confirming or reducing or enhancing or annulling’ the assessment. Further while doing

SHRI DURDUNDESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NYT,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, GOKAK

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 306/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita No. 306 To 307 & 311/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Durdundeshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamita Subhash Road, Sankeshwar Belagavi-591313 Pan:Aaaas5612D . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Rijula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 270ASection 80PSection 80P(2)

note that, while dealing with the first appeal filed u/s 246A of the Act, the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act mandates the Ld. NFAC to cease the first appeal conclusively either ‘confirming or reducing or enhancing or annulling’ the assessment. Further while doing

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 687/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Veekas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 250

taxing the entire sale consideration as income. It is painful to see such appellate order. 7. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his/her mind

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 686/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Veekas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 250

taxing the entire sale consideration as income. It is painful to see such appellate order. 7. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his/her mind

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO,WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 685/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Veekas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 250

taxing the entire sale consideration as income. It is painful to see such appellate order. 7. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his/her mind

JASWINDER SINGH GREWAL,PUNJAB vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 968/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 968/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jaswinder Singh Grewal, The Ito, H. No. 569, Phase Iiia, बनाम Ward 6(1), Mohali 160053 Chandigarh Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Ajwpg9873E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 251Section 69A

assessment 968-Chd-2025 5 order was passed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act by the AO, the Ld. CIT(A) invoked section 251 ((1)(a) and remanded it back to the file of the AO. 5. The Ld. DR further argued that the action ... fully justified as the Act empowers the CIT(A) by inserting section 251 (1)(a) that in case an assessment order has been passed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act and if the Assessee fails to file the full details before

VANGUARD MEDIA PRIATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 27(3), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5639/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Years:2017-18

Section 120Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)

result of which the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC set-aside the case for re-adjudication by the Assessing Officer invoking the powers under section 251(1)(a). 4. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We find that there is a dispute of assessee having three PANs

HYDERABAD RING ROAD PROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,INDIA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE

In the result Appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4090/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Chinu Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI vs. M/S HYDERABAD RING ROAD PROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result Appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3599/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Chinu Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN

M/S VIVEK CONSTRUCITON,BALCO NAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 67/RPR/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 66 & 67/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2021-22 & 2023-24) Vivek Construction, C-17, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Housing Board Colony Balco Nagar, Tax, Circle-1(1), Ayakar Bhawan, Korba, Chhattisgarh, 495684. Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, Cg - 495001 Pan: Aaffv3390P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. (Adjournment Petition Filed) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Ms. Bharti Singh, Cit-Dr Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 06/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

For Appellant: None. (Adjournment petition filed)For Respondent: Ms. Bharti Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

appeals in writing with well-reasoned orders on each point of determination arisen for his consideration. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his/her mind

Showing 1–20 of 1,012 · Page 1 of 51

...