“Section 251(1)(a)”

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

The decision most relied on for Section 251(1)(a) is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688), cited in 1,372 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 251(1)(a)

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 688 · 1991 · Supreme Court

1,372

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)

297 CTR 614 · 2017 · High Court

659

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution or default in appearance. Under Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits, even in an ex parte proceeding.

CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

44 ITR 891 · 1962 · Supreme Court

278

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot enhance an assessment by introducing a new source of income or by changing the head of income during appellate proceedings.

Skycell Communications Ltd. v. DCIT

251 ITR 53 · 2001 · High Court

253

citing judgments

Technical services involve human intervention and expertise, not just routine or machine-based operations. Routine customer support and standard facility provision through technology do not constitute technical services under the Act.

CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co.

251 ITR 864 · 2001 · High Court

240

citing judgments

An appellate authority cannot introduce a new source of income that was not considered by the Assessing Officer; taxability of new sources should be addressed through reassessment provisions like Section 147/148 or revision under Section 263.

CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd.

326 ITR 251 · 2010 · High Court

196

citing judgments

If approval from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for an in-house R&D centre is granted during the previous year, the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) for the entire expenditure incurred during that year.

Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT

231 ITR 1 · 1998 · High Court

186

citing judgments

The first appellate authority must admit additional evidence if it is necessary for determining the true state of affairs and preventing undue hardship or a failure of justice, even without a specific request and particularly when the case falls under Rule 46A(1)(c).

Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT

266 ITR 99 · 2004 · Supreme Court

181

citing judgments

The Revenue cannot take a conflicting stand from what it had earlier accepted in a previous assessment year without compelling justification. This principle of consistency applies to various issues, including the treatment of customs duty in closing inventory.

Judgments citing Section 251(1)(a)

Indus Towers Ltd., Gurugram, Haryana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 12(1), New Delhi

ITA 2607/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142Section 143(3)

Crores and directing to allow the balance amount of Rs 3.95 Crores after verification in contravention to the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred ... erred in law and facts in giving the above direction which is in contravention to the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

Riddhi Agro Industries, Raipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur

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

ITA 458/RPR/2025[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Raipur07 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.458/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-10 Riddhi Agro Industries Telghaninaka Overbridge, Annapurna Complex, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aakfr3802M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Siddhartha Agencies, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

ITA 123/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.A.R

Section 144Section 147Section 250

demised on 24.01.2022 i.e. before the initiation of the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act, thus, as per the “Proviso” to Section 251(1) of the Act, ithat was inserted vide the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.10.2024, restored the matter to the file of the A.O. for framing ... r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 23.03.2022, thus, in exercise of the powers that were vested with him, as per the “Proviso” to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act that was inserted vide the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.10.2024, restored the matter to the file

The Shree Daivadnya Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Mapusa vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 85/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2017-18 The Shree Daivadnya Urban Co-Op. Credit Society, Ltd. Office No. 211, 2Nd Flr., Cosmos Centre, Mapusa, Goa-403507 Pan:Aabat3738J . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: None [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 24Section 25Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Sushma Singh, Baikunthpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Manendragarh

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

ITA 388/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Raipur05 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.388/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sushma Singh H No. 17/1, Baisagarpara, Baikunthpur, Koriya (C.G.)-497 335 Pan: Dyrps4354H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Mahendragarh ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ved Prakash Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Pareshpari Pravinpari Gosai, Morbi vs. ITO WD-1 Morvi, Morvi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.258/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 69

remitted the assessee`s case back to the file of the Assessing Officer, observing that as per the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Commissioner (Appeals) in case of order of assessment made u/s 144 of the Act, may set aside such assessment

Babubhai Joitaram Patel, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT/ACIT Cent-1, RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.15&23/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Babubhai Joitram Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ 9 Suvas Colony St Xaviers High Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, School Road. Gujarat-380 014 Central Circle –1, Rajkot, Income Tax Officer, Amruta Estate Building, M.G. Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdpp5355 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 153CSection 250

appellate orders passed by the Commissioner Appeals on or after 01/10/2024. b. Introduction of Proviso to Sec 251(1)(a) Proviso to Section 251(1)(a) has been introduced with effect from 01/10/2024 and it reads as follows - "Provided that where such appeal is against an order of assessment made ... been specified time To complete fresh assessment pursuant to setting aside of the assessment order by the CIT Appeals as per proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the IT Act with effect from 01.10.2024. 5.4 In view of the above legal provisions and considering that the matter requires factual

Babubhai Joitaram Patel, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT/ACIT Cent-1 RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 15/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 153CSection 250

Sameer Gehlaut, London vs. DCIT, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2532/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT D/R

Section 144Section 147Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 28

further inquiries as mentioned in para 8 of the CIT(A) order and any further inquiry, if necessary, by erroneously invoking provisions to section 251(1)(1)(a). 2.1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that once the initiation of proceedings ... assessment order for A.Y. 2017-18 was passed by the AO u/s 144 r.w.s.147 of the Act. Therefore, as per the proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s.147 dated 16/03/2022 is set aside to the file of the AO for making fresh

Amjad Usman Khan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1973/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 54

pertinent to note that by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.10.2024, the learned CIT(A) has been empowered under section 251(1)(a) of the Act to set aside the assessment and remand the case back to the AO for making a fresh assessment, in case the assessee files

Arunkumar Mithalal Soni, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23-1-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 6687/MUM/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nirav Shah & Shri Viraj BhayaniFor Respondent: 07.05.2025

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 48Section 69A

said to have filed application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A before the appellate authority in terms of Proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2024, where the ld. CIT(A) can set aside the assessment to the ld. AO in case of assessment

T C L India Holding Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner, NFAC

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2283/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankartcl India Holding Private V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, 114, Mahim United बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 11(3)(1), Industrial Premises, Moghal Aaykar Bhavan, 427, 4Th Floor, Lane, Mahim (W), Mumbai – M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 016, Maharashtra 400020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabct9975D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Stefan Richard Moraes, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)

Section 144Section 144r

direct the AOto make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as per section 250(4) of the Act. 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

Late Shri. Kasam Nurmad Karadiya, Jogeshwari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(4)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2069/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankarlate Shri Kasam Nurmad V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Karadiya बनाम 41(4)(2), Kautilya Bhavan, (Through His Legal Heir Shri Rahemtullah Kasambhai Avenue 3, Near Videsh Karadiya) 804, Anand Co-Op Bhavan, G Block Bkc, Hsg Society, Behram Baug Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Jogeshwari West, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Mumbai–400102, Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aahpk5855E Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: None. Paper book on recordFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 27Section 54F

Kaushal Anil Shah, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-20, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1952/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Reepal G. Trashawala,ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,(CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 69C

also direct him to do what he has failed to do......."These observations are squarely applicable to the interpretation of section 251(1)(a). Even otherwise, an appellate authority while hearing appeal against the order of a subordinate authority has all the powers which the original authority may have

Mrs. Nidhi Yadav, Dehradun vs. ITO, Rudrapur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.115/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.117/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 Nidhi Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-801, Forest Residency, Ward 2(1)(4), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Income Tax Office, Pin Code: 248014 Rudrapur, Uttarakhand Pan: Acapy5157E (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Mohit Dev, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amarpal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

appeal in writing with well-reasoned order 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 ... issues which arise from the impugned order before him/her, whether or not these issues have been raised by the assessee before him/her. 9. Section 251(1)(a) of the Act provides that while disposing of an appeal against assessment order, the Ld. CIT(A) shall have the power to confirm

Smt. Nidhi Yadav, Dehradun vs. ITO- W-2(1)(4), Rudrapur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 115/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Srithik Ispat Private Limited, Goa vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Panaji, Goa, Panaji

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 Pan : Aaics1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Din & Order No 1068425181(1) Dt. 06/09/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Originated From Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. [‘Ld. Ao’].

For Appellant: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)Section 40Section 68

done in that manner and in no other manner’. 12. We now also note that, by virtue of insertion of proviso to section 251(1) of the Act which came into effect from 01/10/2024, the Ld. NFAC/CIT(A) is now empowered to set-aside the ex-parte order passed

Sandeep Kaur Gill, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer. Ward 3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 236/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.236/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/102, Shukla Colony, Ravi Shankar, Shukla Ward, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 5

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Lucknow vs. Sapien Educational Society, Sultanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross

ITA 311/LKW/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Income Tax Officer V. Sapien Educational (Exemption) Society Room No.426, 4Th Floor, 1, C/O Xaviers High Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57, School, Mahvaria, Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow- Sultanpur-228001. 226001. Pan: Aagas2725K (Appellant) (Respondent) C. O. No. 01/Lkw/2024 (In Arising Out Of Ita. No. 311/Lkw/2023) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sapien Educational Society V. Income Tax Officer 1, C/O Xaviers High School, (Exemption) Mahvaria, Sultanpur-228001. Ram Tirath Marg Narhi, Lucknow-226001. Pan: Aagas2725K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Suyash Agarwal, Adv Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suyash Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 270A

verify the expenditure claimed by the assessee and thereafter compute the income. (B.4) Powers of Ld. CIT(A) have been mentioned in section 251(1) of the Act, the relevant provisions of which are reproduced below:- Powers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner (Appeals). 251. (1) In disposing ... such other material as may be brought on his record, confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment.” (B.5) The aforesaid proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act was inserted by Finance Act (No.2) Act, w.e.f. 01.10.2024. Thus, the Ld. CIT(A) had powers to set aside the assessment

Indian Medical Association Pune Branch, Shukrawar Peth vs. DCIT Exemption Circle, Pune, Swargate

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 766/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

still when the issue came before ld. CIT(A) who also possesses co-terminus power with that of A.O and as per section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Id. CIT(A) in disposing the appeal against order of assessment has the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul ... still when the issue came before ld. CIT(A) who also possesses co-terminus power with that of A.O and as per section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Id. CIT(A) in disposing the appeal against order of assessment has the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul