← 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)

Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Ahmednagar

ITA 392/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.392/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit At Post: Maldad, Tal.:Sangamner, Dist.: Ahmednagar-422608 Pan: Abbak1395E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 80P(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

The Jalgaon Peoples Co-Operative Bank Limited, Jalgaon vs. DCIT Circle-1 Jalgaon, Jalgaon

ITA 185/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.185/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Jalgaon People Co-Op. Bank Ltd. 152, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon-425001. Pan: Aacat1603M . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Rajendra Damodhar Jadhav, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 717/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.717/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 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 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

Niranjan Kumar Hirjee, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-33(7), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 145/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)

Department challenging the action of Ld. CIT(A) in restoring the matter to Assessing Officer for verification in view of the amendment to Section 251(1)(a) with effect from 01.06.2001 becomes wholly academic and, therefore, the ground raised by Department is dismissed as infructuous. Further , since the Cross objection

Pratap Chandra Sau Welfare Trust, Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward-38(1), Midnapur

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

ITA 375/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Department challenging the action of Ld. CIT(A) in restoring the matter to Assessing Officer for verification in view of the amendment to Section 251(1)(a) with effect from 01.06.2001 becomes wholly academic and, therefore, the ground raised by Department is dismissed as infructuous. Further , since the Cross objection

Pratap Chandra Sau Welfare Trust, Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward-38(1), Midnapur

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

ITA 374/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Department challenging the action of Ld. CIT(A) in restoring the matter to Assessing Officer for verification in view of the amendment to Section 251(1)(a) with effect from 01.06.2001 becomes wholly academic and, therefore, the ground raised by Department is dismissed as infructuous. Further , since the Cross objection

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Pune vs. Enterprisedb Software India Private Limited, Pune

ITA 989/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 989/Pun/2023 & Co No. 008/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Pune . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Sonal Sonkavde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 246A(1)Section 250Section 253(2)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘C’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Jolly Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 255/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.255/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" : Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Smt. Deepa Sanjay Hiray
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 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 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

Sovereign Pharma Private Limited, Pune vs. DCIT CPC TDS, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1216/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PatakhFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Budruk
Section 154Section 192Section 194(1)(ba)Section 200ASection 201

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Akshay Dilip Nahar, Jalna vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jalna

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 953/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune vs. Sandvik Coromant India Pvt Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1072/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1072/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Dy.Commissioner Of Sandvik Coromant India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle-8, Vs Ltd., Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Cross Objection No.7/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sandvik Coromant India The Dy.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Patakh – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Ita 1072/Pn/2023 Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Co No.7/Pun/2024 Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] U/S.250 Of The Act, For A.Y.2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 43B

।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL

Anil Tarachand Kadu, Ahmednagar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(1), Pune

ITA 1059/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1059/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Anil Tarachand Kadu, The Deputy Gut No.115, Ranjankhol, V Commissioner Of Income Tilaknagar, Ahmednagar, S Tax, Central Cirlce-1(1), Ahmednagar – 413720. Pune. Pan: Aplpk9182P Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Vinita Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2013-14 Dated 07.08.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : Anil Tarachand Kadu [A]

Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

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 ... Anil Tarachand Kadu [A] 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

Anil Tarachand Kadu, Ahmednagar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(1), Pune

ITA 1058/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1058/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Anil Tarachand Kadu, The Deputy Gut No.115, Ranjankhol, V Commissioner Of Income Tilaknagar, Ahmednagar, S Tax, Central Cirlce-1(1), Ahmednagar – 413720. Pune. Pan: Aplpk9182P Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Vinita Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2013-14 Dated 07.08.2023 Emanating From The Penalty Order U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act, 1961 Dated 20.06.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing The Ex-Parte Order, Without Anil Tarachand Kadu [A]

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

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 3 Anil Tarachand Kadu ... 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

Shri Samarth Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Pune vs. ITO, Exemotion Ward, 2 Pune, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 629/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.629/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 246ASection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 69A

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

Sigmalon Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 10, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 603/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.603/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 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 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

Jai Shriram Sahakari Path Sansthan Mariyadit, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 6(4), Pune

ITA 173/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.173/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jai Shriram Sahakari Pat The Income Tax Officer, Sansthan Maryadit, V Ward-6(4), Pune. 1085, Bhawani Peth, S Padmashali Puram, Kamgar Middan, Nr Watar Tank, Pune – 411042. Pan: Aacaj7371A Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 10.10.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming & The Ito, Ward 6(4), Pune (Learned Ao) Erred In Law & On Facts In Assessing Appellant'S Total Income At Rs.1,17,73,000/- By Making Addition Of The Same Amount U/S 69A Of The Ita, 1961. 2. Learned Cit(A) & The Learned Ao Erred In Law & On Facts In Making Addition U/S 69A Without Appreciating That Cash Deposit By The Appellant Is Not Income Of The Appellant As The Same Amount Was Collected From Msedcl Consumers On Behalf Of Msedcl & Back-To-Back Transferred To Msedcl & Jai Shriram Sahakari Path Sansthan Maryadit [A]

Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

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

Ykm Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1020/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. M. Balaganeshykm Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Signature Tower – A, Circle – 4(1) 14Th Floor, South City New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana Pan No. Aaacy 0460 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajkumar, C.A. Shri J. P. Sharma, C.A. Revenue By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2024 Order Per M. Balaganesh: 1. This Appeal In Ita No.1020/Del/2019 For A.Y. 2015-16 Arises Out Of The Order By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Gurgaon In Appeal No. 314/17-18 Dated 20.11.2018 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 14.12.2017 By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao). 2

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. M

Nikhil Inderchand Jain, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3), Nagpur

ITA 121/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

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 ... Nikhil Inderchand Jain [A] 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

Vinod Sabhapati Pandey, Chandrapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Nagpur

ITA 111/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.111/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vinod Sabhapati Pandet, The Income Tax Officer, C/O. Chadda Transport, Ward V Ward-4, Chandrapur. No.05, Manikgarh Cement S Rd, Bakhardi, Gadhchandur, Chandrapur – 442908. Pan: Bgppp8723F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Agrawal – Adv.(Ar) Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2013-14 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Vinod Sabhapati Pandet [A]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 44A

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

Apeak Infotech Private Liminted, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur

ITA 103/NAG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.103/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Apeak Infotech Private The Assistant Limited, V Commissioner Of Income Room No.3, Ground Floor, S Tax, Plot No.101, East High Court Circle-4, Nagpur. Road, New Ramdas Peth, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Aafca5453R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Hitesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, For A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S Apeak Infotech Private Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

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