How many judgments cite Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others?

87 judgments on BharatTax cite Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others (17 SCC 117), spanning 2020 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 90, Section 139(1), Section 143(1), Section 154, Section 91, Section 295(1).

Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others

17 SCC 117Supreme Court of India2008#1298 most cited

What is Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others authority for?

Procedural law serves as an aid to justice, not an obstruction, and should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; it is subservient to substantive justice.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sambhaji v Gangabai · 17 SCC 117 · procedural law · handmaid of justice · not mandatory · Section 90 · Section 90A · Foreign Tax Credit · Form 67 · delay in appeal · additional grounds

Sections most often in play

Section 90 Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154 Section 91 Section 295(1)Section 90A Section 10A(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 295 section 90a azadi bachao andolan section 255(4)foreign tax credit section 91 section 114(e)section 136 section 90(2)section 43(3)section 193 section 196

Judgments citing Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others

Ram Avadhanulu Jonnavithula, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1645/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Navneeth N. Kini, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

…all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." The Tribunal further held that: Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in [2008] 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Vamsi Krishna Ayyalasomayajula, Telangana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1469/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Vaidehi G., CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 6(1)Section 90(2)

Basavalinga Sadasivaiah Ajaikumar, Mysore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1470/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…ortance to the non- observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Neetu Agarwal, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 67/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Puja Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2020-21 Neetu Agarwal, Income Tax Officer, Flat 6C, Block 2, Ward 7(1), Kolkata Shree Ramnagar Residential Aayakar Bhavan, Kolkata Vs Complex, VIP Road, Telgharia, Kolkata - 700052 (PAN: ACTPA2426P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Puja Agarwal, C.A. Respondent by : Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee…

Andrew Jerome Joseph, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 5(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 664/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department

Section 143(1)Section 90

…ortance to the non-observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Krishnakumar Balasankara Subramanian, Bangalore vs. DCIT Circle 3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 247/BANG/2024[ 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Preeti Goel, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 220(2)Section 234BSection 245Section 90

…portance to the non-observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Anindya Sarkar, Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru, Bengalru

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1345/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Roy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

…ht of the provisions of 10 Anindya Sarkar : AY: 2020-21 DTAA, section 295(1) of the Act, the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner (1992 Supp (1) SCC 21), Sambhaji Vs. Gangabai (2008) 17 SCC 117 and a lot many decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court including the case m Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) etc. and reached a conclusion that since Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in the case of delay in filing Form 67 and such filing within the time allowed for filing the return of in…

Asha Rani Pandya, Indore vs. CPC Bangalore, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 176/IND/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniasha Rani Pandya Dcit/Acit-1(1) 389 1Ad- Scheme No.74C Indore Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqqpp7081A Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain & Shri Prakash Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28 .06.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90Section 91

…portance to the non-observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Manav Malik, Noida vs. ACIT Circle 5(2)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2293/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2019-20 Manav Malik, Vs Acit, B-146, Sector-19, Circle 5(2)(2), Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh – 201 301. Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Apzpm1646L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Kirti Bindal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024

For Appellant: Ms Kirti Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

…ortance to the non- observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others, reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant. It is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the Act, but an aid. The procedures are handmaid and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; the procedural law is al…

Ramakrishna Rao, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Alipurduar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 541/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…considered the issue in the light of the provisions of DTAA, section 295(1) of the Act, the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner (1992 Supp (1) SCC 21), Sambhaji Vs. Gangabai (2008) 17 SCC 117 and a lot many decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court including the case in Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC) etc. and reached a conclusion that since Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in the case of 10 Ramakrishna Rao Chintalapudi, AY: 2020-21. delay in filing Form 67 and such filing wit…

Maya Kapoor, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 783/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Deepesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

…ITA No.-783/Del/2024 Maya Kapoor. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 783/Del/2024 (Assessment Year- 2021-22) Sh. Maya Kapoor, Income Tax Officer, 284, Espace, Sector-50, Vs. Ward- 2(4), Gurgaon, Haryana-122018. Gurgaon. PAN No: AASPS8817R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date of Hearing : 16.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 ORDER PER SUDHIR PAREEK, JM This appeal is preferr…

Moog Motion Controls Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 184/BANG/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aadcm 3828 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas K. P, Ca Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. PAN : AADCM 3828 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Srinivas K. P, CA Revenue by : Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 20.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Membe…

Sukdev Sen, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir. 61, Kolkata

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

ITA 78/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 90Section 90(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘बी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. No.78/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sukdev Sen……………................................…...........................……….……Appellant 1503 55, Nerul Seawoods Estate, NRI Complex, Sector-54,56,58, Navi Mumbai-400706. [PAN: BNDPS4119K] vs. ACIT, Circle-61, Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri S. S. Gupta, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT,…

Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 239/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, Advocate byFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2021-22 Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju, The Asst. Director of 12, 3rd Floor, 4th Cross, Income Tax, 14th Main, Adarsha Layout, Vs. ITO, CPC, Hongasandra, Bangalore. Bangalore South, Bommanahalli S.O Bangalore-560 068. PAN : BAQPS 0277 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate by Revenue by : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department Date of hearing : 12.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.04.2024 O R D E R PER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD S…

Gurcharan Singh, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Delhi

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

ITA 380/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyagurcharan Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward 7 (1), 12/161, Malviya Nagar, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017. (Pan : Aakps0492G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2024 Date Of Order : 04.04.2024

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 250

…o. 67 as only a procedural defects and has also considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner (1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases21) and Sambhaji and Others vs. Gangabai and others [2008] 17 SCC 117 (SC), which laid down the proposition that procedural law should not be construed as mandatory and should only aid the claim of substantive right. 13. Furthermore, the said decision of the tribunal has also relied on various decisions, which held that provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, as far as it is beneficial to the assessee…

Narendra Nath Ratnakaram, Bangalore vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-5(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1101/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Adam Kajabee, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 80ASection 90

…ubmitted by the Ld.AR that violation of procedural norms does not extinguish the substantive right of claim of FTC. Assessee has placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sambhaji and Others vs. Gangabai and Others reported in (2008) 17 SCC 117, wherein it has been held that procedure cannot be a tyrant but only a servant, it is not an obstruction in the implementation of the provisions of the act but an aid. Hon’ble Supreme Court further emphasised that the procedures are handmade and not the mistress. It is a lubricant and not a resistance. A procedural law should not ordinarily be con…

Narendra Nath Ratnakaram, Bangalore vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-5(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1100/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Adam Kajabee, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 80ASection 90

Uma Maheshwar Rao Vendavelli, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5 (3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 34/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri.Monish Sawkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Subramanian.S, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, Vice-President & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No.34/Bang/2024 : Asst.Year 2020-2021 Uma Maheshwar Rao Vedavelli The Assistant Director of Flat 101 A Block, Income-tax, CPC v. Sai Mitra Meadows. Bangalore. 1st A Cross Kaggadasapura C.V.Raman Nagar Post Bangalore – 560 093. PAN : ACGPV2295Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Monish Sawkar, Advocate Respondent by : Sri.Subramanian.S, Addl.CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 07.03.2024 Date of Hearing : 07.03.2024 O R D E R Per George George K, Vi…

Power and Energy Consultants India Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-19(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3420/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshpower & Energy Consultants Vs. Ito, India Pvt. Ltd, Ward-19(1), House No. U-136, Vikas Marg, Delhi Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg3625J Assessee By : Shri Harish Chaudhary, Ca Shri Mohit Chaudhary, Ca Ms. Neetu Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2024

For Appellant: Shri Harish Chaudhary, CaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90Section 90ASection 91

Nira vs. Inh Kishoresinh Gehlot, Indiavs.CPC, Bangalore (Present Jurisdiction -Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad), Gujarat

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1068/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1068/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Niravsinh Kishoresinh Cpc बनाम/ Gehlot Bangalore Vs. Shivam Vasant Chowk, Present Jurisdiction - Dharmaj, Petlad Dist Income Tax Officer Anand, Anand, Gujarat Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad 388430 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajtpg6241P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Balaji V., Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. Dr 01/02/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/02/2024 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Appellant Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Chennai (‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Intimation Order Dated 20.03.2020 Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions Made By The Respective Parties & We Have Also Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record.

For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1068/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Niravsinh Kishoresinh CPC बनाम/ Gehlot Bangalore Vs. Shivam Vasant Chowk, Present Jurisdiction - Dharmaj, Petlad Dist Income Tax Officer Anand, Anand, Gujarat Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad 388430 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AJTPG6241P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Balaji V., AR अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR 01/02/2024 Da…