Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2020-21. The assessee's grievance was that the CIT(A) confirmed the AO's action of determining total income as Rs. 3,27,19,543/- instead of Rs. 39,760/- as per the return filed under section 153C.
Held
The Bench noted that the appeal should have been filed against the intimation order under section 143(1). The assessee's counsel stated that the appeal before the CIT(A) was pending adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's intimation under section 143(1) is maintainable when the original appeal before CIT(A) was still pending.
Sections Cited
143(1), 153C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE
O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assesse is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) – 53, Mumbai [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] dated 31/05/2025 pertaining to AY 2020-21.
The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO who determined the total income at Rs. 3,27,19,543/- as per the intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act instead of determining the total income at Rs. 39,760/- as per the return of income filed u/s 153C of the Act. 3. At the very outset, the Bench pointed out that the appeal should have been filed against the intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel stated that the appeal has been filed before the ld. CIT(A) and the same is pending adjudication. Taking notice of this, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.