DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the adjustment of tax rate by the CPC under Section 143(1) on a debatable issue without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee was not justified. Therefore, the cross-objection filed by the assessee was allowed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order directing the AO to charge tax at 25% instead of 30%. The assessee's cross-objection argued that the tax rate adjustment was outside the scope of Section 143(1) and required an opportunity of being heard.
What were the issues?
Whether the CPC can adjust the applicable tax rate under Section 143(1) on a debatable issue without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.268 citing300 ITR 403 · 2008 · SC
- Rajesh Kumar v. DCIT121 citing157 Taxmann 168 · 2006 · SC · Read judgment
- Khatau Junkar Ltd. v. K S Pathania103 citing196 ITR 55 · 1992 · HC
- CIT v. Punjab Stainless Steel Industries59 citing364 ITR 144 · 2014 · SC · Read judgment
- Lalchand Bhagat Ambikaram v. CIT53 citing83 ITR 508 · 1972 · HC
- Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT45 citing236 ITR 671 · 1999 · HC
- Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT15 citing404 ITR 564 · 2018 · HC
- JKs Employees Welfare Fund v. ITO9 citing199 ITR 765 · 1993 · HC
- Jaipur 2. Gujarat Poli-Aux Electronics Ltd. v. DCIT8 citing424 ITR 664 · 2020 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS ASTHA CHANDRA
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy //
Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 04.06.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 09.06.2025 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Head 9 Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
More judgments on Section 36(1)(vii)
- Bank of India, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, MumbaiITA 2810/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- ITO-41.3.4, Mumbai vs Urmila Syntex, MumbaiITA 2458/MUM/2026[2013]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026
- Dar Housing Limited, Nct of Delhi vs DCIT Central Circle- 15, DelhiITA 1881/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Small Industries Development Bank of India…ITA 870/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Small Industries Development Bank of India… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central…ITA 9170/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026