Sanjeev Gopal v. ADIT

145 Taxmann.com 378Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2022#14920 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90Section 143(1)Section 128(9)Section 10A(5)Section 10B(5)Section 139(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 295processing under section 143(1)section 90aazadi bachao andolanforeign tax creditsection 91section 90(2)section 80acsection 139(5)section 80asection 90tax treaty

Judgments citing Sanjeev Gopal v. ADIT

Prabhnoor Singh, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 904/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 904/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Prabhnoor Singh, Vs The Ito, B-408, Meda Heights, Ward 6(1), Bellandur, Doddakannelli Road, Chandigarh. Near Aet Circle, Bangalore. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Dcjps5821M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Preeti Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Preeti Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 128Section 128(9)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 904/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Prabhnoor Singh, Vs The ITO, B-408, Meda Heights, Ward 6(1), Bellandur, Doddakannelli Road, Chandigarh. Near AET Circle, Bangalore. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: DCJPS5821M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Preeti Goyal, CA Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 08.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09…

Prukalpa Sankar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(5), Bengaluru

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2100/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Karanjot Singh K & Devashish JainFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 90

…hen such an adjustment can also not be made in the return processed under section 143(1) of the Act. 8.2 The second controversy, whether filing of form 67 is mandatory or directory, has been settled by the Bangalore ITAT in the case of Sanjeev Gupta v. ADIT (145 Taxmann.com 378) wherein it was held that filing Form 67 is not mandatory for claiming FTC under Rule 128 of Rules. Denial of FTC due to delayed filing of Form 67 would be inconsistent with the intent of the provisions. The relevant extract is reproduced as under: 16. I have given a careful consideration to the rival submissions. I agree with the conten…

Prukalpa Sankar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(5), Bengaluru

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2099/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Karanjot Singh K & Devashish JainFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 90

…hen such an adjustment can also not be made in the return processed under section 143(1) of the Act. 8.2 The second controversy, whether filing of form 67 is mandatory or directory, has been settled by the Bangalore ITAT in the case of Sanjeev Gupta v. ADIT (145 Taxmann.com 378) wherein it was held that filing Form 67 is not mandatory for claiming FTC under Rule 128 of Rules. Denial of FTC due to delayed filing of Form 67 would be inconsistent with the intent of the provisions. The relevant extract is reproduced as under: 16. I have given a careful consideration to the rival submissions. I agree with the conten…

Kalidoss Natarajan, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1976/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Balaji V, C.AFor Respondent: Shri V Parithivel, JCIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Kalidoss Natarajan, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of 202, Parimala Orchid B Block, Income Tax, Circle – 3(3)(1), Hv Reddy Layout, Brookfield, Bangalore. Bangalore. PAN – AGGPN 1724 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Balaji V, C.A Revenue by : Shri V Parithivel, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 25.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2024 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the assessee challenging the order da…

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)

…return of income, yet the Revenue should have accepted the claim made by the assessee in the revised return of income. In holding so, we draw support and . Page 3 of 9 guidance form the order of this Tribunal in the case of Sanjeev Gopal Vs. ADIT reported in 145 Taxmann.com 378, wherein it has held as under: 6. Aggrieved by the order of NFAC (Appeals), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case includi…

Tessolve Semiconductor Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 310/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…ITA No.310/Bang/2024 Page 1 of 12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.310/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2021-22 M/s. Tessolve Semiconductor Private Limited, Vs. DCIT, Circle - 7(1)(1), Bengaluru. Plot No.31(P2) Semicon Park, Electronic City Phase II, Bengaluru - 560 100. PAN : AABВСТ 9789 М RESPONDENT APPELLANT Assessee by : Shri. B. R. Sudheendra, CA Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 03.06.2024 ORDER Per Soundararajan K,…

Sanjeev Gopal v. ADIT (145 Taxmann.com 378) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax