“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)

Praksh Pushparaj Golcha, Andheri (W) vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4417/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarpraksh Pushparaj Golcha, V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of 6A, Shivkrupa H Wing, बनाम Income Tax– 24(3), Old Nagardas Road, M/O Finance, Income Tax Andheri(W), Department, National Faceless Mumbai-400 069, Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabpg9404H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Mr.Ruturaj H. Gurjar,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani,(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

including on all the grounds P a g e | 9 A.Y. 2011-12 Prakash Pushparaj Golcha, Mumbai of appeal. Moreover, the perusal of section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act and of Explanation of section 251(2) thereof shows that the CIT(A) is required to apply ... mind. This non- application of mind is a contravention of statutory role of CIT(A) u/s 251(2) of the Act. Also, section 251(1)(a) provides that while disposing of an appeal against Assessment Order, Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment

Vishwanath Bellad, Gokak vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Gokak

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 61/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 061/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vishwanath Bellad No123, Godan Plot No. 494, Dalgi Gokak, Belgaum-591312 Pan : Bcapb0771N . . . . . . .Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gokak. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr S B Gadadi [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order No. 1067775179(1) Dt. 20/08/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 25/03/2022 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr S B Gadadi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(3)Section 69A

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

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Nagpur vs. Sanjay Meemraj Agrawal, Nagpur

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 38/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

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

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, in setting aside the assessment order as per the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the factual matrix of the AO having submitted remand report during the course of appellate proceedings, thus ... making provisions of section 250(4) and section 251(1)(a) no longer applicable. 2 Sanjay Meemraj Agrawal ITA no.38/Nag./2025 2. Any other ground that may be raised during the course of appellate proceedings.” 3. In this appeal, the case of the Revenue is that the learned

Date Property Trust, Pune vs. ITO Ward 12(1), Pune

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

ITA 496/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.496/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24 Date Property Trust, V The Income Tax Officer, 265 A/3, Yashwant Building, S Ward-12(1), Pune. Shaniwarpeth, Opp.Omkareshwar Temple, Lokmanyanagar, S.O.Pune, Pune – 411030. Pan: Aaatd4736C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Smt.Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Ahmedabad Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, 30.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2023-24. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(1)Section 234Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration ITA No.496/PUN/2025 [A] 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 or annul ... 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

Mukesh Agarwal, Agra vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(2), Agra

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 68/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

possession of ld. CIT(Appeals), he was not justified to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer by resorting to proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 5. Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue supported the impugned order. 2 | P a g e 6. There is no quarrel ... legal aspect that w.e.f. 01.10.2024, ld. CIT(Appeals) is empowered vide proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer in a case when the assessment order is passed u/s. 144 of the Act. It also transpires from the perusal

Alice Lourdes Martins, Chinchinim vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji

ITA 39/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 039/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Alice Lourdes Martins 404, 1St-Palvem, Chinchinim Salcete, South Goa, Goa Pan : Abkpl2128D . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Jayant Volvoikar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

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

Abdulkareem Mohaddin Bagawan, Nipani vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Nipani

ITA 312/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 312/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Abdulkareem Mohaddin Bagwan Vegetable Market, Tal.: Chikodi, Dist.: Belgavi. Pan:Aespb0271J . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Vimalraj Periyagounden [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 44A

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

Gangappa Dundappa Agasar, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(5), Belagavi

ITA 28/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 028/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Gangappa Dundappa Agasar Badli, Saundatti, Belgaum-591111 Pan : Apzpa2849H . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 01/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/04/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1065969614(1) Dt. 24/06/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 02/12/2019 Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Belgavi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

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

Dodhia Chem Tex Private Limited, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 765/Mum/2025 is dismissed

ITA 765/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedodhia Chem Tex Private Vs Dcit-Cc-3, Thane Room No.12, A-Wing, 6Th Floor, Limited, 98/2, Dodhia House New Mavji Ashar It Park, Thane (West)-400 Compound, Narpoli Behind 604 Ratan Talkies, Bhiwandi, 421 302 Pan : Aajcs0580R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Simran DhavanFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal,(CIT DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)(a)

that the assessment was completed exparte under section 144 and additions were made by making disallowances under different heads. After the amendment to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Ld.CIT(A) is empowered to set aside the assessment order for further adjudication to the Ld. AO. The observations ... appellant can file necessary documents and evidences on the issues involved in the appeal.In view of these facts and the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the impugned assessment order u/s. 144 of the Act is being set-aside and the matter is referred back

Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur

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

ITA 19/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT a

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. (6A)……………. (7)……………. Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) Section 251(1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers - 13 Sh. Panka Mani Khulshrestha vs. ITO (a) in an appeal against ... stating the points for determination and then render a decision 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

Govindbhai Bhavandas Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 4(2)(2), Ahmedabad (Existing ITO Ward 4(2)(1), Ahmedabad)

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 256/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Who Has Set Aside The Exparte Assessment Order Invoking Section 251(1)(A) Of The Act By Observing As Follows:

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 251(1)(a)Section 271FSection 69A

order. 3. Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has set aside the exparte assessment order invoking Section 251(1)(a) of the Act by observing as follows: “In appeal, inter-alia, appellant has stated that appellant was in the USA during financial year ... cases where assessment order was passed as best judgment case u/s 144 of the Act, the CIT(A) has been empowered in section 251(1)(a) to set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the AO for making a fresh assessment, in appellate orders passed

Shivajs Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Jodhpur

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

ITA 185/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Ble

Section 246ASection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

stating the points for determination and then render a decision 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 CITT(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 dear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the OT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise

Ashok Tilak Sapra, Porvorim vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 12/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]

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

ITAT Rules-1963, perused the material placed on record. At the outset we note that, in view of newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act vide para 6 of the impugned order the Ld. NFAC has set-aside the ex-parte assessment order passed

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1542/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1541/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Nalini Vijay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1540/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

grievously erred in law and or on facts in not set a siding the assessment as per Section 251(1)(a) as the assessment was concluded ex parte under section 144. 4.2 That in the law and/or on facts, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have set a side ... assessment as per Section 251(1)(a) as the assessment was concluded ex parte under section 144. 5.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and / or on facts in upholding the invocation of the provisions of Section 115BBE 5.2 That in the law and/or on facts

Nalini Vijay Shah, Satellite vs. Ward 3(1)(2) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1539/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neeju Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo, Calangute vs. ACIT, C-1(1), Panaji

ITA 275/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 275/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo H.No. E-100, Pobha Vado, Calangute, Bardez, North Goa, Goa Pan : Acbpl9307J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Vinod Totekar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Nazeera Mohammad [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064290058(1) Dt. 23/04/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 27/12/2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Asstt. Commission Of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Vinod Totekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Nazeera Mohammad [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 54E

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

Bhimashankar Ssk Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT- Circle-8, Pune

ITA 1147/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1147/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13 Bhimashankar Ssk Ltd., V The Acit, A/P. Pargaon, Tal.Ambegaon, S Circle-8, Pune. Dist-Pune – 412406. Pan: Aaaab0949G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hanmant Dattatry Dhavle – Ar Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 23.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law Of The Learned Nfac –Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Delhi, Has Erred In Disallowing & Adding Back An Amount Of Rs.42,23,17,760/- On Account F Excess Cane Price Paid Farmers.

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(19)Section 250Section 80ISection 80P(2)(d)

stating the points for determination and then render a decision 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

Sharp Business Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 717/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Sh. Vinay Sharma, Dcit, Central Circle-18, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan: Bdqps4406L (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.60/Del/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita No.712/Del/2019] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Dcit, Sh. Vinay Sharma, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, Central Circle-18, Ghaziabad New Delhi Pan: Bdqps4406L (Appellant) (Respondent) With Ita Nos.716 & 717/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vs. Sh. Dheer Chand Sharma, Dcit, Central Circle-18, B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan: Bdlps0502C (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. Nos.64 & 65/Del/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita Nos.716 & 717/Del/2019] Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vs. Dcit, Sh. Dheer Chand Sharma B-373, Swarnajyanti Puram, Central Circle-18, Ghaziabad New Delhi Pan: Bdlps0502C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)

bogus, the CIT(A)’s action adding the above percentage of 2.5% representing the profit element therein, amounts to an enhancement under section 251(1)(a) of the Act which is not sustainable in law going by CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC); CIT Vs. Sardari