How many judgments cite PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.?

308 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (416 ITR 613), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 292B, Section 143(2), Section 142(1).

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

416 ITR 613Supreme Court of India2019#253 most cited

What is PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. authority for?

A notice issued under section 148 to a non-existent entity, such as an amalgamating company post-merger, is a substantive illegality, rendering assessment proceedings void ab initio. Participation in such proceedings does not estop the assessee from challenging the validity of the notice.

308

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. · section 148 · section 143(2) · non-existent entity · amalgamating company · merger · void ab initio · substantive illegality · estoppel · reassessment proceedings

Also reported as

107 Taxmann.com 375265 Taxmann 515

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 292B Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 144 Section 250

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 170 transferor company transferee company section 2(1a)section 2(31)section 159 section 39 amalgamation section 292b scheme of arrangement section 292 legal representative

Judgments citing PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

Ishwar Chand Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward 1(3), New Cgo Complex

ITA 2844/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraishwar Chand Aggarwal Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3) 3D-29, Nit Faridabad Nh-4, Nit, Haryana – 121001 Faridabad, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpa5364Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…. The said notices are required to be served within the time limitation prescribed. Moreover, as held by the Apex Court in the case of (Principal Commissioner of Income- tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613 (SC)/416 ITR 613), participation in proceedings by the appellant cannot operate as estoppel against law. It is also held by the Courts that notice to assume jurisdiction, such as notice u/s.148, when issued in respect of a dead person/non-existent entity is a case of substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in section 292BB.…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2273/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.2271, 2272 & 2273/Del/2018 AYs 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2010-11 ACIT, Vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 201-H, Gautam Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. PAN: AABCF2227J CO Nos.67, 68 & 69/Del/2022 (in ITA Nos.2271, 2272 & 2273/Del/2018) AYs 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2010-11 Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 201-H, Gautam Nagar, Central Circle-15, New Delhi – 110 049. New Delhi. PAN: AABCF2227J (Appellant/Cross Objector) (Respondent) Assessee b…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2272/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2271/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 602/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ul suppression of fact of amalgamation by the assessee and hence, is distinguishable from the facts of your Appellant's case. 2.3. The CIT(A) incorrectly ignored Appellant's reliance to decision of the Apex Court in Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC) and decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Spice Entertainment v. CIT in 2012 (280) ELT 43 (Delhi) which have upheld the principle that notice issued in the name of amalgamating entity is invalid and therefore any proceedings taken against such notice would be void ab initio. 3. Since the legal issue raised in the above ground, esp…

Income Tax Officer Ward-5 Yamuna Nagar, Yamuna Nagar vs. Shivalik Filling Station, Khizrabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 960/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, CIT, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 250Section 42Section 69A

…ny further 4 addition in the hands of a dissolved firm would lead to double taxation of the same income, which is not permissible under law. 5.6 In support, reliance was placed on several judicial precedents including PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC) and Spice Infotainment Ltd. (2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del), to contend that assessment framed against a non-existent person is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 6. Upon careful consideration of rival contentions and material placed on record, we find that the core issue relates to the validity of reopening and addition made in the hands of…

DCIT, Central Circle, 1-(4), Kolkata vs. Kkalpana Industries India Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2589/KOL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2589/Kol/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-2011) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4), Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 4Th Floor, Room No.3, New Kolkata B.K.Market, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.07.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Ld. Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Barred By 79 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Accordingly, Delay Of 79 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Dr That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Originally Processed U/S.143(1) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Assessment Was Reopened By Issuing Of Notice U/S.148 Of The Act Dated

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…pleted wherein an addition of Rs.3,02,81,162/- was treated as the unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) had following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., reported in 416 ITR 613, annulled the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act and had quashed the reassessment proceedings. It was the submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 5. In reply, ld. AR has filed his written submissions which read as follows:– Submissions: Ground No.1 of Departmental Appeal :…

Shree Ganesh Commodity Brokers, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hissar

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 5016/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…& 148 as well as the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act by relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613. The relevant portion of the Judgment reproduced as under:- “8.Having heard the Learned Advocates for the respective parties, it appears that the respondent-Assessing Officer has issued the impugned notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act in the name of the partnership firm having PAN No. AAFFP3449M as well as passed the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act agains…

Shree Ganesh Commodity Borkers, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hissar

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 5015/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No. 5016/Del/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Shree Ganesh Commodity Vs. Ito Brokers B-10 Ravi Plaza, Ward-1 95-97 Green Square Hissar Market, Hisar, 125001, Haryana Pan: Acbfs5547B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Advocate C. S. Anand & Advocate Vaishnavi Yadav Revenue By Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) & Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement /06/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Represented By Its Former Partner Sh. Rajkumar Jangid, Challenging The Orders Dated

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…148 as well as the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act by relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613. The relevant portion of the Judgment reproduced as under:- “ 8. Having heard the Learned Advocates for the respective parties, it appears that the respondent-Assessing Officer has issued the impugned notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act in the name of the partnership firm having PAN No. AAFFP3449M as well as passed the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act aga…

The Singhbhum District Central Cooperative Bank, Chaibasa vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 177/RAN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.177/Ran/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Singhbhum District Central Cooperative Bank, Chaibasa...……….……Appellant Represented By Jsbs, Madhubazar, Chaibasa, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aaajt2036K] Vs. Acit, Nfac, Delhi……….............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Sr. Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 30, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 13.06.2023 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’).

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 292BSection 36(1)(vi)Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RANCHI” BENCH, RANCHI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.177/Ran/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Singhbhum District Central Cooperative Bank, Chaibasa...……….……Appellant Represented by JSBS, Madhubazar, Chaibasa, Jharkhand – 833201. [PAN: AAAJT2036K] vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi……….............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Sr. CIT, DR, appeared on behalf of the Responden…

DCIT Circle-52(1), Income Tax vs. Pranav Gupta, Legal Heir of Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 2192/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roydcit, Cir-52(1) Vs. Sh. Pranav Gupta, 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2, Legal Heir Of Late Sh. Vijay Block, Civic Centre, Kumar Gupta, 11, Darya Delhi- 110002 Ganj, New Delhi- 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipg0797N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. &For Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…ing deemed assessees, in their names and in their capacity as Legal Heirs of the deceased. The said notices are required to be served within the time- limitation prescribed. Moreover, as held by the Apex Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (416 ITR 613), participation in proceedings by the appellant cannot operate as estoppel against law. It is also held by the Courts that notice to assume jurisdiction, such as notice u/s.148, when issued in respect of a dead person/non-existent entity is a case of substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in section 292BB.…

Rajesh Punyani (L/H of Late Bhagwandas Punyani), Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(3), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

Section 144Section 250Section 69A

…name of the deceased individual without bringing the legal heir on record. Here, we refer to the judgment of the 3 Rajesh Punyani L/H of Late Bhagwandas Punyani ITA no.179/Nag./2025 Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in of PCIT v/s Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC), and the Co–ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, rendered in Rinju Adityakumar Gogoi, L/H of Late Aditya Kumar Gogoi v/s ITO, ITA no.393/Ahd./2024, vide order dated 14/05/2024, wherein the Tribunal have clearly held that any assessment made in the name of a deceased person is null and void, once the Revenue is aware of the death…

DCIT-3(4), Mum vs. M/S Union Bank of India ( Erstwhile Corporation Bank), Mumbai

In the result the cross objection filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 530/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 115JSection 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…n bank which is not existent entity. 6.3 The Ld.AR vehemently submitted that, the issue was also raked by before the Ld.CIT(A). However the same was dismissed without considering the dicision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 613. 6.4 On the contrary the Ld.DR relied on the orders passed by the authorities below. The Ld.DR submitted that, section 292BB of the Act would come to rescue the present scenario to the revenue. We have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 7. It is noted that, the fact of corporation Bank having a…

DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai vs. Birla Group Holding Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all assessment years under consideration stands dismissed

ITA 6368/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 170(1)(a)Section 292B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 6371/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & I.T.A. No. 6368/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & I.T.A. No. 6373/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & I.T.A. No. 6353/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & I.T.A. No. 6369/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai Vs. Birla Group Holdings R.No. 420, Kautilya Private Limited Bhavan, BKC, 1st Floor, Industry Mumbai-400051 House, 159, Churchgate Reclamation, Churchgate, Mumbai- 400020 PAN:AAACR2250C (Appe…

DCIT-CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Raghuleela Estates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5741/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

…eased to exist. The assessee requested to withdraw the notice issued us. 148 of the Act stating that the issue in consideration is not a res Integra and has already been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited [416 ITR 613] wherein it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the assessment against a non-existing entity is a jurisdictional defect. The assessee has also challenged the reopening proceedings contending that the same is time barred. The other arguments regarding the validity of the proceedings relate to the legal position prevailing before the amendme…

DCIT-CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Raghuleela Estates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5740/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

DCIT -CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Raghuleela Estate Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5739/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

Rang Mahal, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Meerut

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

ITA 5326/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Anand, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 44ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rang Mahal, vs. ITO, Ward 2 (2), 1, Sharda Road, Delhi Road, New Delhi. Meerut – 250 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AASFR3224K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rohit Agarwal, CA REVENUE BY : Shri B.S. Anand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.03.2025 Date of Order : 14.05.2025 O R D E R 1. The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 30.07.2023 for the Assessment Y…

Venetian Ldf Projects LLP, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3533/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

…the name and PAN of a non-existent entity is, in view of the settled law, illegal and bad in law. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: - Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT: 186 ITR 278 (SC) - PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.: 416 ITR 613 (SC) - PCIT v. Vedanta Ltd.: [2025] 170 taxmann.com 833 (Del) - International Hospital Ltd. v. DCIT [2024] 167 taxmann.com 317 (Del) - Spice Entertainment Ltd. CST 2012 (280) ELT 43 (Del) - PCIT v. Vertex Customer Management India Private Limited: ITA No. - 606/2019 (Del) - Religare Enterprises Limited v. ACIT: (WP No. 13807/2022) (Del) - Pharmaz…

Marie Products Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7, Jaipur

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

ITA 771/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik, CIT

Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 771/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 cuke Marie Products Private Limited Assistant Commissioner of Vs. H-20A, RIICO Industrial Area, Income Tax, Kukas, Tehsil Amer, Jaipur Circle-07, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAGCM4747F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh.…