Powers & Limitations of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)

What is an Appeal Before CIT(A)

An appeal is filed with the CIT(A) from Appealable Orders listed in Section 246A of the Act and the procedure in appeal before the CIT(A) and the powers of the CIT(A) are governed by Sections 250 and 251 of the Act respectively. The provision of section 250 lays down the procedure in appeal before the appellate authority against the orders of the Assessing Officer. The appellate authority has been named differently from time to time in the statute. Originally, the appellate authority was described at the relevant time as Appellate Assistant Commissioner and now as Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal),  CITA.

The Supreme Court has categorically held in ITO v. M. K. Mohammed Kunhi [1969] 71 ITR 815, that the right of appeal is a substantive right and questions of fact and law are at large and are open to be reviewed and decided untrammeled by any restrictions or inhibitions.

“The right of appeal is a creature of statute and unless an appeal is provided for specifically or by necessary intendment, such a right cannot be availed of by any party”.

The Nature of Appeal before CITA

a) CITA has been constituted as a revising authority against the decisions of the Income-tax Officer; a revising authority not in the narrow sense of revision what is the subject matter of the appeal, not in the sense of revising those matter about which the assessee makes a grievance, but a revising authority in the sense that once the appeal is before him he can revise not only the ultimate computation arrived at by the Income-tax Officer but he can revise every process which led to the ultimate computation or assessment.

b) In other words, what he can revise is not merely the ultimate amount which is liable to tax, but he is entitled to revise the various decisions given by the Income-tax Officer in the course of the assessment and also the various incomes or deductions which came in for consideration of the Income-tax Officer.

c) “An appellate authority under the taxing enactments sits in appeal, only in a manner of speaking. What it does, functionally, is only to adjust the assessment of the appellant in accordance with the facts on the record and in accordance with the law laid down by the Legislature.

d) An appeal is a continuation of the process of assessment, and an assessment is but another name for adjustment of the tax liability to accord with the taxable event in the particular taxpayer’s case.

e) There can be no analogy or parallel between a tax appeal and an appeal, say, in civil cases. A civil appeal, like a law suit in the court of first instance out of which it arises, is really and truly an adversary proceeding, that is to say, a controversy or tussle over mutual rights and obligations between contesting litigants ranged against each other as opponents. A tax appeal is quite different. Even as the assessing authority is not the taxpayer’s ‘opponent’, in the strictly procedural sense of the term, so too the appellate authority siting in appeal over the assessing authority’s order of assessment is not strictly an arbitral tribunal deciding a contested issue between two litigants ranged on opposite sides.

f) “In a tax appeal, the appellate authority is very much committed to the assessment The appellate authority can itself enter the arena of assessment, either by pursuing further investigation or causing further investigation to be done. It can do so on its own initiative, without being prodded by any of the parties. It can enhance the assessment, taking advantage of the opportunity afforded by the taxpayer’s appeal, even though the appeal itself has been mooted only with a view to a reduction in the assessment. These are special and exceptional attributes of the jurisdiction of a tax appellate authority. These attributes underline the truth that the appellate authority is no different, functionally and substantially, from the assessing authority itself. (Madras High Court in Arulmurugan and Co. [1982] 51 STC 381)

g) The CITA can’t revise orders of the Income-tax Officer under any circumstances if the assessee does not appeal from those orders, however erroneous the order of the Income-tax Officer may be, however prejudicial to the revenue, the assessee by refusing to exercise his right of appeal could make that order conclusive.

h) But once the assessee decides to file an has appeal, there is no difficulty whatsoever in the way of the department in agitating any question before the CITA which in its opinion should be agitated and decided in the interest of public revenue.

i) Now, it is clear that when an appeal is pending before the CITA, the Income-tax Officer has the right to be heard either in person or by a representative.. Once an appeal is pending before the CITA, the Commissioner is  given the full right to get the order of the AO revised in any manner he thinks necessary in the interest of public revenue.

Therefore the assessee must weigh his options very carefully before filing an appeal before the CITA because once filed, the whole of the order of the AO can be reviewed by the CITA in appeal and sometimes, instead of relief, more hardships may be created by the CITA by deciding on issues not covered in the appeal or negating the benefits granted by the AO.

Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals)-

Section 251(1): Appeals to the Commissioner (Appeals)

251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the following powers-

a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment

b) in an appeal against an order imposing a penalty, he may confirm or cancel such order or vary it so as either to enhance or to reduce the penalty;

c) in any other case, he may pass such orders in the appeal as he thinks fit.

(2) The Commissioner (Appeals) shall not enhance an assessment or a penalty or reduce the amount of refund unless the appellant has had a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement or reduction.

Explanation.-In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) may consider and decide any matter arising out of the proceedings in which the order appealed against was passed, notwithstanding that such matter was not raised before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the appellant. (The power of the CITA to set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment has been removed by the Finance Act, 2001, w.e.f.1-6-2001).

A fine reading of the above powers in the light of various judicial pronouncements, we can exemplify the powers of the CITA as under:

Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals)-

1) The Legislature has conferred very wide powers upon the Appellate Commissioner  once an appeal is preferred to him by the assessee.

2) An appeal is only a rehearing or a retrial. In the absence of any statutory inhibitions or restrictions, CITA has precisely the same powers, exercisable or in the same manner and to the same extent, as the AO has, in the first instance.

3) The powers of the CITA are in the nature of reassessment and once an assessment order is brought before CITA, his power is not restricted to examining only those aspects of the assessment about which the assessee makes a grievance but his powers range over the whole assessment to correct the AO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee in appeal but also with regard to any other matter which has been considered by the AO and determined in the course of assessment.

4) Under sec 250(4)) of the Income-tax Act, the CITA is competent to make such further enquiry as he thinks fit or cause further enquiries to be made by the Income-tax Officer, under remand. He is further empowered to make such fresh assessment and determine, where necessary, the amount of tax payable on the basis of such fresh assessment. (Patna High Court Dated.- July 28, 1955).

5) The CITA’s powers are not confined to consider only these points about which the assessee has a grievance but he may consider those points about which the assessee is satisfied and order the enhancement of the assessment.

6) If an income is the subject-matter of consideration by the AO and even though the AO might have come to the conclusion that that income is not subject to tax, still it would be open to the CITA to take different view and to bring that income to tax.

Limitations on  the Powers of the Commissioner (Appeals)-

1) It is only the assessee who has a right conferred upon him to prefer an appeal against the order of assessment passed by the AO. If the assessee does not choose to appeal, the order of assessment becomes final subject to any power of revision that the Commissioner might have under section 263 of the Income-tax Act.

2) If the assessee chooses to remain content with the order of the AO there is nothing that the CITA can do, however erroneous the assessment may be.

3) Even in case where, CITA wants to exercise powers of enhancement, under Sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act such powers have to be exercised after giving a notice for enhancement providing for a reasonable opportunity of showing cause and not in absence of such a notice.

4) The department cannot prefer an appeal against the assessment  order of an AO to the CITA.  If an error etc. is noticed in the Order then the department has only 3 options to choose from, 1) Rectification u/s 154, 2) Reassessment u/s 147 or, 3) Review of the order u/s 263. (Goel Die Cast Ltd. High Court, Punjab And Haryana April 20, 2007)

5) This provision itself gives an indication that even if the Appellate Authority wants to process a new source of income which forms part of either return of income or the order of assessment, but was not in challenge in appeal before the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority has to give a reasonable opportunity of hearing before processing such a source of income and enhancing the assessment.

6) The subject-matter of the appeal is the assessment and the scope of the appeal is limited by the subject matter. The CITA has no power to travel beyond the subject-matter of the assessment opinion and he is not entitled to assess new sources of income. To do so would not in reality be enhancing the assessment but adding a new assessment to’ the old, the subject-matter being different. (Jagarnath Therani Patna High Court January 15, 1925)

7) However, it is not open to the CITA to introduce in the assessment a new source of income. He has to confine himself to those items of income which were the subject-matter of original assessment.

8) In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn

9) In the absence of any statutory provision, the general principle relating to the amplitude of the powers of the CITA is that such powers are coterminous with that of the initial authority. In the absence of any statutory provision, the appellate authority is vested with all the plenary powers which the subordinate authority may have in the matter. (Supreme Court- September 4, 1990[1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC), Jute Corporation Of India Limited).

10) In view of Section 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. The section mandates that the order of the CIT(A) shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination and render a decision thereon failing which the CITA order is liable to be quashed.

Withdrawal of  the appeal

1) Further, once an appeal is preferred by an assessee, it would not be open to the assessee to withdraw the appeal so as to prevent the CITA from enhancing the assessment under Section 251(1)(a). (Sri Gajalakshmi Ginning Factory Ltd. Madrashigh court April 15, 1952).

2) Once an appeal is filed and confined by the assessee in its subject-matter to a portion of the order it would be open to the Appellate Commissioner to deal with the whole of the assessment order of the Income-tax Officer, even to enhance the assessment. (Vide Commissioner of Income-tax Punjab v. Nawab Shaw Nawaz Khan [1938] 6 I.T.R. 370.) Of course, it would not be open to the Appellate Commissioner to introduce into the assessment new sources, as his power of enhancement should be restricted only to the income which was the subject-matter of consideration for purposes of assessment by the Income-tax Officer. (Madras High Court [1952] 22 ITR 502 (Mad) – April 15, 1952)

3) Thus it is now well-established that an assessee having once filed an appeal cannot withdraw except with the leave of the CITA. In other words, the assessee, having filed an appeal and brought the machinery of the Act into working cannot prevent the CITA from ascertaining and settling the real sum to be assessed, by intimation of his withdrawal of the appeal. Even if the assessee refuses to appear at the hearing, the CITA can proceed with the enquiry and if he finds that there has been an under-assessment, he can enhance the assessment.”

4) Whether there could be withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee, the decision of the Apex Court reported in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967 (8) – SUPREME COURT ] gives the answer that once the machinery is set in motion, the assessee cannot withdraw the appeal – after filing an appeal, the tax payer could not, at his option or at his discretion, withdraw an appeal to the prejudice of the Revenue. Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits.

Disposal/Dismissal of Appeal

1) The powers of the CIT(A) are coterminous with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that the AO could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the AO to not complete the assessment by rejecting a valid return of income filed properly or allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is also not open to the assessee to withdraw the return. The AO has to dispose off the return by completing the assessment, be it ex-parte order for non-cooperation.

2) Likewise, the CIT(A) can’t 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 from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. He has to dispose off the appeal on merit and by  speaking order and can’t dismiss it for non-attendance by the assessee.

3) The CITA has to see that a true assessment ought to be, and that process, a public process directed to public ends, cannot be stopped at the option or the whim of the appellant who after giving notice begins to realise that if he pursues his appeal it may be the worse for him. The matter has passed out of his hands : he has given rise by his notice of appeal not merely to the opportunity but to the duty of performing a public task which may have an effect entirely opposite to that which he contemplated and desired.”

Admission of additional grounds of appeal

1) The declaration of law in section 251(1)(a) of the Act is clear that the power of the CITA is conterminous with that of the AO and the appellate authority can modify the assessment order on an additional ground even if not raised before the AO. However, the CITA must be satisfied that the ground raised is bona fide and that the same could not have been raised earlier for good reasons. failure to adduce earlier the evidence sought to be adduced before the CITA must not willful and not unreasonable. (Rai Kumar Srimal v CIT [1976] 102 ITR 525 Cal)

2) The Act does not contain any express provision debarring an assessee from raising an additional ground in appeal and there is no provision in the Act placing restriction on the power of the appellate authority in entertaining an additional ground in appeal.

3) The CITA has all the powers to consider a case for raising an additional ground himself if the ground so raised could not have been raised at that particular stage when the return was filed or when the assessment order was made, or that the ground became available on account of change of circumstances or law. There may be several factors justifying the raising of such a new plea in appeal, and each case has to be considered on its own facts. If the CITA is satisfied, he would be acting within his jurisdiction in considering the question so raised in all its aspects. Of course, while permitting the assessee to raise an additional ground, the CITA should exercise his discretion in accordance with law and reason, he must be satisfied that the ground raised was bona fide and that the same could not have been raised earlier for good reasons. The satisfaction of the CITA depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case and no rigid principles or any hard and fast rule can be laid down for this purpose.

4) The Calcutta High held that the CITA was entitled to admit new grounds or evidence either suo-motu or at the instance of the assessee. The Supreme Court held that there can be no doubt being invited by the assessee, then there must be some ground for admitting new evidence in the sense that there must be some explanation to show that the failure to adduce earlier the evidence sought to be adduced before the CITA was not willful and not unreasonable. (Rai Kumar Srimal v CIT [1976] 102 ITR 525 Cal)

5) If an assessee, in an appeal before the CITA against an order of assessment does not question the decision of AO on the point decided and consequently the CITA also does not consider that point in his order, then in further appeal to Tribunal,  assessee is not entitled to question the decision of the AO on the point in an appeal to the Tribunal against the order of the CITA . (Gujarat High Court– September 4, 1968 [1969] 74 ITR 254 Karamchand Premchand Private Limited). 

Other Important points

1) Where an order passed by the CITA in appeal confirms or reduces or enhances or annuls the assessment, the order of assessment passed by the AO ceases to exist and is merged in the order of the CITA and the order that stands and is operative thereafter is not the order of the AO but the order of the CITA not only in respect of matters considered and decided by the CITA but also in respect of matters not dealt with by him. (Tejaji Farasram Kharawala, (Bombay High Court).and was affirmed by the Supreme Court. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co).

2) While considering the scope and powers of the appellate authority, under the Income Tax Act, 1961, courts have consistently held that the power of the first appellate authority are coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer and that the appellate authority can do what the Assessing Officer ought to have done and also direct the latter to do what he has failed.

3) Appeal is also a continuation of original proceedings and unless some fetters are placed upon the powers of the appellate authority by express words, the appellate authority can exercise all the powers as that of the original authority. For example, if the Assessing Officer, has erred in concluding the status of the assessee as a firm, it cannot be said the CITA, has no jurisdiction to go into the issue.

4) But he cannot refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment; nor can he direct the Officer to decide the case in accordance with his directions.

5) Undeniably, the precedential position on the powers of the first appellate authority under section 251 undulates. There are seeming contradictions. But, as held by Union Tyres [1999 (9) – DELHI High Court ] and as affirmed on reference by Sardari Lal, there is a consistent judicial assertion that the powers under section 251 are, indeed, very wide; but, wide as they are, they do not go to the extent of displacing powers under, say, sections 147, 148, and 263 of the Act.

6) Any appeal, which is not accompanied, for example, either by the requisite Court fee, or any other mandatory payment required to be made as per the provisions of the relevant Statute, cannot be considered as a validly presented appeal, and such appeal would be non-est in the eye of law. Once an appeal is considered as non-est in the eye of law, any order impugned in such appeal cannot be considered as “subject of an appeal”, as there is no ascertainment or adjudication of the issues raised in the appeal on its merits.

The Doctrine of Merger

It would not be out of context now to understand if on the making of the order by the CITA disposing of the appeal, the order of assessment passed by the AO merges in the order of the CITA?

This principle which follows as a necessary corollary from the wide amplitude of the powers of the CITA in disposing of an appeal against an order of assessment was laid down by the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Tejaji Farasram Kharawala, and was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co.

The Supreme Court laid down three conditions that would serve to make the doctrine applicable. These conditions were that the jurisdiction exercised should have been appellate or revisional jurisdiction, that such jurisdiction must necessarily have been exercised after issuance of notice, and that it must have followed a full hearing in presence of both parties. (Shankar Ramchandra Abhyankar v. Krishnaji Dattatreya Bapat( (SC))

“The doctrine of merger is not a doctrine of rigid and universal application, and it cannot be said that wherever there are two orders, one by an inferior tribunal and the other by a superior tribunal, passed in an appeal or revision, there is a fusion or merger of the two orders irrespective of the subject-matter of the appellate or revisional order and the scope of the appeal or revision contemplated by the particular statute.” State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Company Limited (SC)

The Supreme Court held that there can be no doubt that, if an appeal is provided against an order passed by a tribunal, the decision of the appellate authority is the operative decision in law. If the appellate authority modifies or reverses the decision of the tribunal, it is obvious that it is the appellate decision that is effective and can be enforced. In law the position would be just the same even if the appellate decision merely confirms the decision of the tribunal. As a result of the confirmation or affirmance of the decision of the tribunal by the appellate authority the original decision merges in the appellate decision and it is the appellate decision alone which subsists and is operative and capable of enforcement. But if an order is specifically non-appealable it would remain in operation although an appeal in the same proceedings has been taken and decided.

Once an appeal has been decided the CITA, the AO order merges in it; and the Commissioner of Income-tax loses jurisdiction to act under section 263 of the Act..

Supreme Court. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co). This is called the Doctrine of Merger.

However, if any point which is not a matter considered and to be decided by him then, could it be said that there would be any decision of the CITA in regard to that matter.

It is no doubt true that even if the assessee does not carry any matter in appeal by originally including it in the memorandum of appeal or with leave of the CITA under section 250, sub-section (5), the CITA is entitled to consider and decide it since the entire assessment is open before him. But he is not bound to do so and if in fact he does not consider it, it is difficult to see how it can be said that he decided it against the assessee.

It is only if the CITA is under an obligation to examine the correctness of the entire assessment irrespective of the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee, that it could conceivably be urged that the CITA must be presumed to have examined the correctness of the decision of the AO as regards that matter  and if he does not reverse  it, he would  be held to have accepted it as correct. However, the CITA is under no obligation to examine the correctness of every decision recorded by the AO in the course of the assessment. The entire assessment is of course before him and he had the power, if he so choose, to examine any particular decision of the AO and to correct it if he found it wrong but there being no obligation on him to do so, no inference can be drawn from his omission to reverse the decision of the AO on any particular matter if the CITA does not consider and decide. It is no doubt true that the order of assessment passed by the AO merges in the order of the CITA and the order of the CITA is thereafter the only operative order of assessment but that has no bearing on the question as to whether there is any decision of the CITA on the question of that matter from which an appeal could be preferred by the assessee or the revenue.

For example:- In one case, the assessment made by the AO was confirmed by the CITA, save in respect of the second claim which was partially allowed but the confirming of the assessment in respect of the disallowance of the third claim was not because the disallowance was proper but because the disallowance was not challenged by the assessee before the CITA and no relief was claimed in respect of it and the CITA also did not suo motu examine the question of its correctness.

There was therefore no decision of the CITA on the question of disallowance of the third claim. In such a case what are the further remedies for the assessee? None?

Because it is difficult to imagine how an assessee can be heard to say that, though he did not claim any particular relief in the appeal preferred before the CITA and the CITA had therefore no occasion to decide whether such relief should be granted or not, he is still aggrieved by the decision of the CITA in not granting such relief to him? How can an assessee complain that an order does not grant him a particular relief, when such relief is not claimed by him in the appeal? How can it be said by an assessee that the CITA erred in deciding a particular matter against him when no opportunity is given by him to the CITA even to make such error? When the assessee seeks to contest in the appeal to the Tribunal that the CITA erred in deciding a particular matter against him, the question would be: where is the decision of the CITA deciding the matter against him by which he is aggrieved? And if there is no such decision, obviously the assessee cannot appeal against it.

Further, suppose in the present case both the first and the second claims had been allowed by the CITA and the CITA had granted full relief claimed by the assessee in the appeal, could the assessee have then said that he is aggrieved by the order of the CITA? How can an assessee who gets full relief claimed by him from the CITA and succeeds wholly in the appeal be ever said to be aggrieved by the order of the CITA and how can he appeal against the order of the CITA when the CITA has not refused to him anything claimed by him? Then again, take a case where a ground of appeal challenging a particular allowance is not originally taken in the memorandum of appeal to the CITA and is subsequently sought to be added with leave of the CITA under section 250, sub-section (5), but the CITA is satisfied that the omission of that ground from the memorandum of appeal was willful or unreasonable and he therefore does not allow the assessee to raise that ground and decides the appeal on other grounds urged on behalf of the assessee. Can it be said in such a case that because the assessment is confirmed, there is an implied decision of the CITA that the disallowance is proper? If such an implied decision could be spelt out, the assessee would be able to raise that point in appeal before the Tribunal though by reason of his default he could not urge it before the CITA. We do not think the legislature could have intended to bring about such a consequence.

It is only if the CITA was under an obligation to examine the correctness of the entire assessment irrespective of the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee, that it could conceivably be urged that the CITA must be presumed to have examined the correctness of the decision of the AO as regards the disallowance of the third claim and since he did not reverse that decision, he must be held to have accepted it as correct.

References:

1) 1953 (3) High Court Of Bombay, Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus AmritlalBhogilal And Co. March 5, 1953

2) 1925 (1) Patna High Court. Jagarnath Therani Versus The Commissioner Of Income Tax January 15, 1925.

3) 1957 (2)- Bombay High Court, [1957] 31 ITR 909, Narrondas Manordass Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, February 13, 1957

4) 1952 Madras High Court in Gajalakshmi Ginning Factory v. Commissioner of Income-tax ([1952] 22 I. T. R. 502).

5) 1956 Bishwanath Prasad Bhagwat Prasad v. Commissioner of Income-tax ([1956] 29 I. T. R. 748), July 28, 1955

6) 1950 Sheriff Jiva & Co. Ltd., Mombassa v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City (IT Reference No. 10 of 1950), delivered on 9th October, 1950

7) 1953 Commissioner of Income-tax v. Tejaji Farasram Kharawala ([1953] 23 I. T. R. 412) and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Amritlal Bhogilal and Co. ([1953] 23 I. T. R. 420)

8) 1997 (3) Supreme Court Dated.- March 5, 1997 [1997] 224 ITR 610 (SC), Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Nirbheram Daluram 1992 (9)  Supreme Court Dated.- September 24, 1992, [1993] 199 ITR 1 (SC), Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Assam Travels Shipping Service 

9) 1990 (9) Supreme Court Dated.- September 4, 1990, [1991] 187 ITR 688 Jute Corporation Of India Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Another

10) 1977 (11) Supreme Court Dated.- November 8, 1977, [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC), Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat Versus Gurjargravures Pvt. Limited

11) 1962 (2) Supreme Court Dated.- February 14, 196, [1962] 44 ITR 891 Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay Versus Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

12) 1974 – Allahabad High Court, May 7, 1974, [1976] 105 ITR 344, J K Synthetics Limited Versus Additional Commissioner Of Income-TAX, UP., And Another

13) 2020 (2) – Bombay High Court – February 5, 2020 Siva Equipment Pvt Ltd , Versus Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa.,

14) 2019 (9) Allahabad High Court September 3, 2019, S.D. Traders Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr.

15) 2018 (8) Calcutta High Court , June 19, 2018, Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-I Versus KPC Medical College And Hospital

16) 1975 (10) TMI 4 – Andhra Pradesh High Court Dated.- October 14, 1975, [1978] 112 ITR 512, PN Balasubramanian Versus Income-Tax Officer, Khammam, And Others

17) 1978 (4) Madhya Pradesh High Court Dated.- April 28, 1978, [1979] 120 ITR 163, SR Kalani Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, MP

18) 1979 (7) Patna High Court Dated.- July 19, 1979 [1980] 121 ITR 778, 4 TAXMANN 34, Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar Versus Cm Rajgarhia

19) 1979 (8) Madras High Court Dated.- August 7, 1979, [1981] 129 ITR 554, 14 CTR 313, 4 TAXMANN 332, Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Tamil Nadu Iv Versus Indian Auto Stores

20) 1980 (8) TMI 34 – Kerala High Court Dated.- August 6, 1980, [1981] 131 ITR 356, 22 CTR 103, 5 Taxmann 218, KP Moideenkutty And Others Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kerala

21) 1980 (10) TMI 47 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT Dated.- October 23, 1980 [1981] 128 ITR 486 Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat I Versus Ahmedabad Kaiser-I-Hind Mills Company Limited

22) 1981 (1) Punjab And Haryana High Court Dated.- January 13, 1981, [1981] 128 ITR 480, 21 CTR 115, 6 Taxmann 76, Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Amritsar-I Versus Jay Textile Mills

23) 1981 (1) TMI 16 – Madhya Pradesh High Court Dated.- January 14, 1981, [1983] 139 ITR 1064, 14 Taxmann 331, Alok Paper Industries Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, MP

24) 1981 (2) TMI 12 – Madhya Pradesh High Court Dated.- February 16, 1981, [1983] 140 ITR 138, 6 Taxmann 224, HH Raja Agit Singh Of Jhabua Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, MP –I

25) 1981 (9) Bombay High Court Dated.- September 17, 1981, Other Citation: [1983] 141 ITR 326, 27 CTR 174, 8 Taxmann 228, Ugar Sugar Works Ltd Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Poona

26) 1982 (1) Madras High Court Dated.- January 11, 1982, [1982] 138 ITR 19, 14 Taxmann 406, NP Saraswathi Ammal And Others Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras

27) 1982 (5) Allahabad High Court Dated.- May 13, 1982 : [1983] 143 ITR 69, 10 Taxmann 309, Vishnu Kumar Gupta Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

28) 1982 (5) TMI 3 – Allahabad High Court Dated.- May 14, 1982, [1984] 145 ITR 255, 37 CTR 49, 13 Taxmann 414, SP. Kochhar Versus Income-Tax Officer, Dehradun

29) 1985 (2) Rajasthan High Court Dated.- February 19, 1985, [1985] 154 ITR 665, 48 CTR 325, 23 Taxmann 573, Tulsilal Manilal Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

30) 1985 (12) Madhya Pradesh High Court Dated.- December 7, 1985 : [1987] 165 ITR 296, 64 CTR 68, DR. (MRS.) Bimla Gulati Versus Appellate Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax

31) 1987 (5) Allahabad High Court Dated.- May 20, 1987, [1989] 178 ITR 496, 66 CTR 18, 34 Taxmann 130, Raza Textiles Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

32) 1987 (8) Andhra Pradesh High Court Dated.- August 21, 1987, [1988] 171 ITR 214, 66 CTR 197, 34 Taxmann 425, HS. Imam Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

33) 1988 (8) TMI 82 – Rajasthan High Court Dated.- August 11, 1988, [1989] 175 ITR 636, 73 CTR 249, 41 Taxmann 157, Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Pali Dyeing Co.

34) 1989 (7) Punjab And Haryana High Court Dated.- July 18, 1989: [1989] 180 ITR 625, 49 Taxmann 196, Bal Erectors Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

35) 1990 (7) Kerala High Court : [1991] 187 ITR 86, 89 CTR 248 Popular Automobiles Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

36) 1992 (3) Rajasthan High Court Dated.- March 13, 1992, [1992] 197 ITR 350, 103 CTR 369, 64 Taxmann 215, Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Associated Garments Makers

37) 1992 (10) Delhi High Court Dated.- October 21, 1992, [1993] 202 ITR 249, 113 CTR 161, 71 Taxmann 342, Vijay Sarin Versus Income-Tax Officer

38) 1993 (4)- Bombay High Court Dated.- April 8, 1993, : [1993] 203 ITR 358, 72 Taxmann 181, Asbestos Cement Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax

Disclaimer: This write up is strictly for personal use and also for academic purposes only. The Author incurs no liability for any statement of error or omissions in this write up. No part of this write up can be copied and distributed except with the permission on the author in writing.