Rangnathappa Govindappa Zharkhande v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 290 /225 TTJ 621 (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Capital gains-Business income-Jurisdiction of Commissioner (Appeals) does not extend to introducing an altogether new source of income.[S. 28(i), 45]

On appeal the CIT(A) has bifurcated the Assessing Officer’s long term capital gains’ computation of Rs.74,55,088/-to business income to the extent of business profits of Rs.65,58,156/-.and enhanced the income.  Revenue supported the same on the ground that the CIT(A)’s jurisdiction is co-terminus with that of the Assessing Officer in arriving at the correct computation of an assessee’s taxable income.  Tribunal  relied on following case laws and held that held that Jurisdiction of Commissioner (Appeals) does not extend to introducing an altogether new source of  income,  CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962 ) 44 ITR 891 (SC) CIT v. Union Tyers (1999) 251 ITR 864 (Delhi)(HC))  CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co (2001 ) 251 ITR 864 (Delhi)(HC). (AY. 2012-13 )