← All Phrases

“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)

Dewarkadhish Developers, Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Vadodara

In the result, all three appeals are dismissed

ITA 637/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 635 To 637/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2015-16 To 2017-18) Dwarkadhish Developers, The Deputy Commissioner Plot No. H-3066/4, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Dwarkadhish Residency, Central Circle-2, Esic Hospital Road, Vadodara. Gidc Ankleshwar, Bharuch-393002. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aakfd8537F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Adjournment Application Filed Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Adjournment Application filedFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr-DR
Section 133ASection 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

year, exercising powers under the amended provisions of section 153(3) and the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a), and set aside the assessments to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. A consolidated summary of the relevant details ... find from the appellate orders that the learned CIT(A) has exercised powers under the amended section 153(3) and the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both of which were amended by the Finance Act, 2023. These provisions empower

Dewarkadhish Developers, Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Vadodara

In the result, all three appeals are dismissed

ITA 636/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 635 To 637/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2015-16 To 2017-18) Dwarkadhish Developers, The Deputy Commissioner Plot No. H-3066/4, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Dwarkadhish Residency, Central Circle-2, Esic Hospital Road, Vadodara. Gidc Ankleshwar, Bharuch-393002. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aakfd8537F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Adjournment Application Filed Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Adjournment Application filedFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr-DR
Section 133ASection 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

year, exercising powers under the amended provisions of section 153(3) and the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a), and set aside the assessments to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. A consolidated summary of the relevant details ... find from the appellate orders that the learned CIT(A) has exercised powers under the amended section 153(3) and the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both of which were amended by the Finance Act, 2023. These provisions empower

Dewarkadhish Developers, Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Vadodara

In the result, all three appeals are dismissed

ITA 635/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 635 To 637/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2015-16 To 2017-18) Dwarkadhish Developers, The Deputy Commissioner Plot No. H-3066/4, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Dwarkadhish Residency, Central Circle-2, Esic Hospital Road, Vadodara. Gidc Ankleshwar, Bharuch-393002. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aakfd8537F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Adjournment Application Filed Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Adjournment Application filedFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr-DR
Section 133ASection 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

year, exercising powers under the amended provisions of section 153(3) and the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a), and set aside the assessments to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. A consolidated summary of the relevant details ... find from the appellate orders that the learned CIT(A) has exercised powers under the amended section 153(3) and the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both of which were amended by the Finance Act, 2023. These provisions empower

Aditya Jagdish Lahoti, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 23(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the appeal which is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 265/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankaraditya Jagdish Lahoti, V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of 27/31, 4Th Floor, Bootwala बनाम Income Tax, Circle– 23(1), 113, Building, Old Hanuman 1St Floor, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Lane, Kalbadevi, Mumbai Road, Mumbai – 400007, 400 002, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Ajrpl0027C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, (Sr. DR)
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

also empowered to set aside any assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act as per proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act w.e.f.1.10.2024 as per Finance (No.2) Act,2024.In such a situation, we are of the considered view that the appeal filed by the assessee before

ITO (International Taxation)-1, Hyderaabad vs. Deenababu Kondubhatla, Hyderabad

ITA 347/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 195Section 251Section 251(1)

file of A.O. for making a fresh assessment. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld. DR submitted that though pursuant to the amendment to Section 251(1) of the Act, as had been made available on the statute vide the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f ... therefore, the CIT(A) had wrongly triggered the jurisdiction vested with him as per the “Proviso” to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act. The Ld. DR to buttress his aforesaid claim, had taken us to the observations of the CIT(A) and the assessment order. The Ld. DR submitted

Athimoolam Chettiar Ravi, Madurai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result, appeals filed by both the assessees are allowed for

ITA 3238/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Ms.N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

presumed to have been passed u/s.144 of the Act. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in exercising his powers as provided under proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act and thus, erred in restoring the assessment back to the file of the AO for fresh assessment. Therefore

Venugopal Sethuraman Rajkumar, Madurai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result, appeals filed by both the assessees are allowed for

ITA 3237/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Ms.N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

presumed to have been passed u/s.144 of the Act. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in exercising his powers as provided under proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act and thus, erred in restoring the assessment back to the file of the AO for fresh assessment. Therefore

Sri Sai Baba Sansthan, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption-2, Raipur

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

ITA 248/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.247 & 248/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Sri Sai Baba Sansthan Sai Mandir, Avenue-B, Civic Center, Sector-6, Bhilai-490 006 (C.G.) Pan: Aadts8938G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Exemption-Ii, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80G

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

Sri Sai Baba Sansthan, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption-2, Raipur

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

ITA 247/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.247 & 248/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Sri Sai Baba Sansthan Sai Mandir, Avenue-B, Civic Center, Sector-6, Bhilai-490 006 (C.G.) Pan: Aadts8938G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Exemption-Ii, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80G

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

Designer Stone Impex, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1272/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘‘ए” बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “A” Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Venkataratnam Tiriminchi, Nellore vs. ITO., Ward-1, Nellore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 434/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri S. Prasad Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Vishnu Priya, Sr.D.R
Section 147

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘‘ए” बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “SM-A” Bench, Hyderabad श्री

Ochhab Lal Jain, Udaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 429/JODH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

make the enhancement in these year when the assessment of the related issue is not before him. As the Section 251(1)(a) itself provides 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the 22[* * *] 30[Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers— (a) in an appeal against an order ... discussed nor dealt with in the assessment order of the relevant year) by way of enhancement of income, in terms of provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 8. There is no doubt about the fact that while framing the assessment even under Section

Ochhab Lal Jain, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udiapur, Udaipur

ITA 428/JODH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

make the enhancement in these year when the assessment of the related issue is not before him. As the Section 251(1)(a) itself provides 251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the 22[* * *] 30[Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers— (a) in an appeal against an order ... discussed nor dealt with in the assessment order of the relevant year) by way of enhancement of income, in terms of provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 8. There is no doubt about the fact that while framing the assessment even under Section

Dawoodi Bohra Jamat, Udaipur vs. ITO Ward Exemption Udaipur, Udaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 425/JODH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

shirk his responsibility under the veil of powers to set aside cases, conferred on him vide proviso to section 251(1) of the Income Tax Act. Effective October 1, 2024, the Finance Bill 2024 introduced significant changes to the powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 251 of the Income

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula vs. Venus Remedies Limited, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 378/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Shri Jaspoal Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR (Virtual Mode)
Section 251(1)(a)Section 28Section 41(1)

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in passing the order without adjudicating the issue at hand. As per Section 251(1)(a), the power of CIT(A) to set aside the case to the file of the AO has been taken away by Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f ... this issue. 9. As regards Ground No. 3, which challenges the powers of the Ld. CIT(A) under Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, we have perused the contents of paragraph 9.5 of the impugned order. While certain observations or directions therein may prima facie appear

Shweta Ajaykumar Paharia, Jaymala Apartment, Marve Road, Malad West, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 41(3)(1), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex

ITA 1181/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Mr. Ashutosh PatareFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkari
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Assessee and/or admission of additional evidence. It would be pertinent to point while the CIT(A) has power of enhancement under Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Assessee can also move application for admission of additional evidence to substantiate claims in terms of Section

Niraj Rathi & Sons HUF, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5941/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 147Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)(vii)

that such a course of action is not available to the CIT(A) in exercises of his lower appellate jurisdiction under section 251(1)(a) of the Act. - 4. That being the clinching factual position, the tribunal hereby finds no merit in the impugned addition. The same is directed

DCIT, Chennai vs. Thiyagarajan Ravindran, Chennai

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2054/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2054/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Thiyagarajan Ravindran, No.53/54, 2Nd Lane, Central Circle 1(2), Vs. Chennai Madhavaram High Road (North), Perambur, Chennai – 600 011. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aaepr-1108-E] (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Shivanand K Kalakeri, CITFor Respondent: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 153ASection 2(47)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए ‘ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस िव"ने

Asssisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Kanpur vs. Mohan Lal Gupta, Kanput

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 785/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss)A Nos.781, 782 & 785/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Asstt. Commissioner Of V. Mohan Lal Gupta Income Tax 10/503, Laxmi Niwas Kanpur Allenganj, Kanpur Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) Respondent By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 08 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 05 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 251(1)(a)

rightly set aside the assessment orders passed under sections 153A/144 of the Act to the file of the AO, under section 251(1)(a) of the Act. The Ld. A.R. prayed that in view of the above facts, the appeals of the Revenue are liable to be dismissed

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur vs. Mohan Lal Gupta, Kanpur

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 782/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss)A Nos.781, 782 & 785/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Asstt. Commissioner Of V. Mohan Lal Gupta Income Tax 10/503, Laxmi Niwas Kanpur Allenganj, Kanpur Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) Respondent By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 08 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 05 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 251(1)(a)

rightly set aside the assessment orders passed under sections 153A/144 of the Act to the file of the AO, under section 251(1)(a) of the Act. The Ld. A.R. prayed that in view of the above facts, the appeals of the Revenue are liable to be dismissed