Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT

212 ITR 496High Court1995#2020 most cited

What is Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) are limited to arithmetical errors or incorrect claims that are prima facie apparent from the information provided in the income tax return itself. The Assessing Officer cannot embark on an inquiry beyond the face of the return during summary assessment proceedings.

57

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 143(1)(a) · Section 143(1) · scope of summary assessment · prima facie adjustments · incorrect claim in return · arithmetical error · intimation proceedings · assessment procedure

Also reported as

125 Taxmann 1002

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)(a)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)(iv)Section 10(10AA)Section 11Section 11(1)(e)Section 11(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 143(1a)section 143(1)(a)(iv)retrospective amendmentsection 3(b)section 36(1)(iv)section 143(1)(a)section 2(24)(x)section 10aasection 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 10asection 43b

Judgments citing Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru / I.T.O., Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 143/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) 3 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., AY: 2019-20 d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits…

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 6/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…o be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 5/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…o be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Laxman Nainani, Kota vs. ACIT/DCIT, Central Circle, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 21/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Manisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR JhlanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 21/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2019-20 Shri Laxman Nainani cuke The ACIT Vs. Prop: M/s. Nainani Medico Central Circle Rampura, Kota Kota LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAGPH 9024 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Smt. Manisha C…

First Choice Ready Mix, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-50(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 612/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) I.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 & I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 First Choice Ready Mix & Pratap Kundu Assessment year: 2018-19 d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 39…

Pratap Kundu, Bankura Jogipara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bankura

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 591/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) I.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 & I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 First Choice Ready Mix & Pratap Kundu Assessment year: 2018-19 d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 39…

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru/ACIT, Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 61/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 58/5B, B.T. Road, Kolkata-700002 [Pan: Aakcs3206R] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Acit, Circle-7(2), Kolkata….…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. R. Kothari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 16, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.11.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “For That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Nfac Erred In Sustaining The Addition On Account Of Alleged Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf/Esi Etc. To The Extent Of Rs.792872/- Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer In Summary Assessment.”

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) I.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd. d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. A…

Swastic Oil Industries, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 35/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 cuke M/s. Swastic Oil Industries The ACIT Vs. F-5-F8, Industrial Area Circle-7 Newai, Tonk 304 021 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo…

Swastic Oil Industires, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 cuke M/s. Swastic Oil Industries The ACIT Vs. F-5-F8, Industrial Area Circle-7 Newai, Tonk 304 021 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo…

Paris Elysees India Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 357/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’A’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 357/JPR/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2018-19 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Income Paris Elysees India Private Limited A-135, Perfume Factory, Vs. Tax, Heerawala, RIICO Industrial Area, Circle-7, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCP4088P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asse…

Novo Management Consulting Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

In the result, we do not perceive any merit in this appeal and accordingly the same stands dismissed

ITA 973/DEL/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmanovo Management Consulting Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt Ltd, 440, Ground Floor, Gali Ward-18(4), No D-22, Chattarpur, Pahari, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaecn5211B

For Appellant: Shri Vivan Katyal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Jeetender Chand, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ed that the ld CIT(A) had failed to take into consideration the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC), ACIT Vs. Haryana Telecom Pvt. Ltd 14 taxmann.com 122 (Delhi), Modern Fibotex India Ltd Vs. Dy CIT 212 ITR 496, SRF Charitable Vs. Union of India 193 ITR 95, Pr. CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd 84 taxmann.com 185, CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd 321 ITR 508 (Delhi), CIT Vs. Solar Exports 27 taxmann.com 289 (SC). 6. It was submitted that after the Bharat Hotel Ltd (supra) case in PCIT Vs. Pro Interactive Service India Pvt. Ltd in ITA 98/2018 Hon‟ble Hi…

Grama Vidyodaya Sangha (Regd), Mysuru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri K. Kotresh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 234A

…ma facie adjustment under s. 143(1)(a) has to be considered with reference to the position on the date on which the return is filed and not with reference to the events subsequent thereto. [Samtel Color Ltd v. Union of India [2002] 177 CTR (Delhi) 289: [2002] 258 ITR 1 (Delhi)]. Section 143(1)(a) contemplates that power could be exercised only : (a)(i) in respect of loss carried forward, (a)(ii) deduction, or (a)(iii) allowance, and (a)(iv) relief claimed; (b) the power in respect of the above four items should be on the basis of information available in the return, accounts or "documents; (c) that these items a…

Ansal Api Infrastructure Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle, 2(2), Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1781/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Virender Pratap Singh, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-44(6), Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1779/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Dharamjit Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-52(1), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1767/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Global Groupware Solutions Limited, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1739/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Girdhari Yadav, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1726/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

ACIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1725/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Garg Heart Centre & Nursing Home P.Ltyd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1700/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…

Ritu Mukherji, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-5(3)(1), G B Nagar

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1666/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Garg Heart Centre & ACIT, Circle-10(1) Nursing Home Private National Faceless Appeal Limited Centre (NFAC) 8-9, AGCR Enclave Vs. New Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN-AAACG 0063C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Narendra Kumar Rustogi, Authorized Representative Respondent by Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Commissioner of Income Tax, Departmental Representative (“CIT-DR” for short) Global Groupware Income Tax Officer Solutions Limited Ward-10(1) A-20/16, DLF Phase-1 New Del…