Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT

293 ITR 539High Court2007#3097 most cited

What is Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT authority for?

Once tax has been deducted at source (TDS), the bar of section 205 applies, preventing the deductee from being asked to pay the tax again, even if the deductor fails to deposit the tax or issue TDS certificates.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT · 293 ITR 539 · section 205 · TDS credit · tax deducted at source · deductee liability · deductor failure to deposit · no double payment

Sections most often in play

Section 205Section 143(1)Section 199Section 234BSection 234CSection 200Section 201Section 234A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 205section 203section 221(1)section 194dsection 221section 276section 196section 199section 2(31)credit for tdssection 192section 115a

Judgments citing Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT

Karthik Lakshman, Chennai vs. Iyo, Intl Taxationward-1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2182/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2182/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2024-25

For Respondent: Ms. R.Kavitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 205Section 250

…ecutors of the Estate of S. Shanmuga Mudaliar vs ACIT & Others in TCA No. 388 of 2008 dated 11.08.2014, wherein the Hon’ble High Court has relied on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Yashpal Sahni vs Rekha Hajarnavis vs ACIT, reported in [2007] 293 ITR 539 (Bom) and the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Ansuya Alva vs DCIT reported in [2005] 278 ITR 206 wherein Court held that, “the facts and circumstances of the above case is similar to the facts of the present case. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the bar under sec. 205 of the Act prevents the department from dema…

Hemant Enterprises, Nashik vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Nashik

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

ITA 394/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Deepa Khare-AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.D. Kulkarni, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 234A

…elied on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Ashok Kumar B. Chowatia vs. JCIT (TDS) [435 ITR 449 (Mad.- 6 ITA.No.394/PUN/2025 (Hemant Enterprises) HC) and also the decision Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hashpal Sahni vs. ACIT [293 ITR 539 (Bom.-HC). 6. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. We have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also perused the judicial precedents cited before us. The facts of the case are not in dispute. Admittedly, in the instant case, t…

Nisar Ebrahim Ookabhoy, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 16(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6638/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 143(1)Section 199Section 205

…s, and it was once again clarified that assessees shall not be called upon to pay where tax has already been deducted from their income. 14. The assessee fortified his submissions by reliance on judicial precedents. In Yashpal Sahni v. Rekha Hajarnavis [2007] 293 ITR 539 (Bom), the jurisdictional High Court held that once tax has been deducted at source, the bar of section 205 squarely applies and the deductee cannot be asked to pay again, even if the employer or payer has failed to deposit the tax or issue TDS certificates. 15. The Bombay High Court in Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain v. UOI [2019] 103 taxmann.com 1…

Nalini Tukaram Nikam, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Pune

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

ITA 2747/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2747/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

…fact that the tax has been deducted by the payer from the income of the appellant and paid to the Central government, the claim for credit by the appellant appears to be on the right footing in view of the judgment Gujarat High Court in Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT (293 ITR 539) and the Mumbai I.T.A.T. in the case of Capt. J. G. Joseph Vs. ACIT (92 ITD 358). Therefore, JAO is directed to give credit to the TDS amount based on the TDS certificates and 26AS in the system. However, the JAO will place all the TDS certificates, 26AS on the record. Appellant is directed to file all the required documents before the JAO after…

Naik Naik and Co, Mumbai vs. ACIT -16(3), Mumbai

In the result we hold that the assessee is entitled to credit of TDS to the extent deduction from its receipts is established on the basis of the contemporaneous material placed on record

ITA 2915/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

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

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

…s, and it was once again clarified that assessees shall not be called upon to pay where tax has already been deducted from their income. 14. The assessee fortified his submissions by reliance on judicial precedents. In Yashpal Sahni v. Rekha Hajarnavis [2007] 293 ITR 539 (Bom), the jurisdictional High Court held that once tax has been deducted at source, the bar of section 205 squarely applies and the deductee cannot be asked to pay again, even if the employer or payer has failed to deposit the tax or issue TDS certificates. 15. The Bombay High Court in Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain v. UOI [2019] 103 taxmann.com 1…

Chenthanmara Kp Nair, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax - 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4979/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailchenthanmara Kp Nair, G-103 Ekta Bhoomi Garden 1 & H Co-Op. Hsg Soc. Ltd., Datta Pada Road, Borivali (East), Mumbai ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400066 V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – 42(2)(1), C41-43, G Block Bkc, Gilban Area, ……………… Respondent Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai - 400051 Pan : Acrpn1974B Assessee By : Shri Uday P. Shah Revenue By : Shri Vikas Chandra, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Uday P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Chandra, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 205Section 250

…to the assessee on the ground that, there was mis- match in the TDS certificate issued by the deductors and the aggregate amounts arrived at as appearing in form 26-A. The Tribunal referred to and relied on the decision of this Court in case of Yashpal Sahni 293 ITR 539 and observed that, in case, the deductor has failed to upheld the correct details in form 26-A the benefit should be given to the assesssee on the basis of evidence produced before the Department. Resultantly, the Tribunal only directed the Assessing Officer to verify the correct facts and give credit of TDS to the assessee. No question of law ar…

Late Soli C. Engineer, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 42(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment 3 years stands allowed

ITA 1985/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

…extent to which the tax has been deducted at source by the deductors. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions that supports this contention: i. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Yashpal Shani v/s. Hajarnavis, ACIT & Others reported in (293 ITR 539) ii. Decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MIlind Arvindbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (455 ITR 82) iii. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of BDR Finvest (P) Ltd. V Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, 161 Taxmann.com 583. iv. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Sanjay Sudan v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2023)…

Late Soli Engineer, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 42(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment 3 years stands allowed

ITA 1984/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

…extent to which the tax has been deducted at source by the deductors. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions that supports this contention: i. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Yashpal Shani v/s. Hajarnavis, ACIT & Others reported in (293 ITR 539) ii. Decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MIlind Arvindbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (455 ITR 82) iii. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of BDR Finvest (P) Ltd. V Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, 161 Taxmann.com 583. iv. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Sanjay Sudan v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2023)…

Late Soli Engineer, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 42(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment 3 years stands allowed

ITA 1983/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

…extent to which the tax has been deducted at source by the deductors. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions that supports this contention: i. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Yashpal Shani v/s. Hajarnavis, ACIT & Others reported in (293 ITR 539) ii. Decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MIlind Arvindbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (455 ITR 82) iii. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of BDR Finvest (P) Ltd. V Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, 161 Taxmann.com 583. iv. Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Sanjay Sudan v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2023)…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Communications Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 5979/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 5979/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Dcit-1(3)(1), Mumbai V/S. Tata Communications Ltd. Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, बिाम Videsh Sanchar Bhavan, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mahatma Gandhi Road, Road, Churchgate, Fort, Mumbai Gpo, Maharashtra-400020 Maharashtra-400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacv2808C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Hemanshu Joshi

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi
Section 143(3)

…ates amounting to Rs. 4,87,05,943/-. It is a fact that if the credit is claimed by filing physical TDS certificate, the same cannot be denied, as held by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi (supra) and the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Yashpal Sahni 293 ITR 539. It is equally true that the decision of the coordinate bench mentioned hereinabove has been upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay mentioned hereinabove. 7. We find that while upholding the order of the coordinate bench, the Hon’ble High Court held that, “Resultantly, the Tribunal only directed the AO to verify the correct facts and give cre…

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6990/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025
Section 143(1)

…icial decisions in support of its contentions. The operative part ons in support of its contentions. The operative part of the decision decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under- "24. As stated earlier, in the present case petitioner "24. As stated earlier, in the present case petitioner-assessee has assessee has established that from his salary income, tax has been deducted at d…

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6989/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025
Section 143(1)

…icial decisions in support of its contentions. The operative part ons in support of its contentions. The operative part of the decision decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under Yashpal Sahni vs. ACIT (293 ITR 539) is reproduced as under- "24. As stated earlier, in the present case petitioner "24. As stated earlier, in the present case petitioner-assessee has assessee has established that from his salary income, tax has been deducted at d…

Dhananjay Sanjiv Rawal, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 17(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 39/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Dhananjay Rawal, ARFor Respondent: 11.02.2025
Section 143(1)

…not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income. This provision came up for consideration before division bench of this Court in case of Yashpal Sahni v. Rekha Hajarnavis Asstt. CIT [2007] 165Taxman 144/293 ITR 539. It was a case where the employer while paying salary to the employee had deducted tax at source Rs.6.66 lakhs. Subsequently, disputes arose between the employer and employee due to which service of the employee was terminated. The employee filed the return of income claiming credit of TDS of Rs.6.66 lakhs. The Assessing Officer issued intimation…

Xander Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur

ITA 549/RPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 549/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Taranuum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 205Section 234Section 234BSection 250

…hat Chandra Jain Vs. Union of India [ 309 CTR 218 (Born) ] - Page - 104 of PB, 6 Xander Finance Private Limited vs ACIT, Central-1(1), Raipur c. Incredible Unique Buildcon Pvt Ltd. Vs. ITO (Delhi)- Page 111 of PB d. Yashpal Sahni Vs. Rekha Hajamavis, ACIT [ 293 ITR 539 (Born)] Page 118-119 of PB e. Shri Rajesh Dadu Vs. DCIT [ ITA No. 34/Hyd/2023, order dt.31/03/2023 (Hydrabad Bench of ITAT) - at page- 131 & 132 of PB f. Office Memorandum issued by CBDT on 11/03/2016 - page - 133 of PB. Further reliance is placed on following decisions: a. Ashok Kumar Chowatia Vs. JCIT (TDS) [435 ITR 499 (Mad) ] b. ACIT Vs.…

Shri. S. Sathyaraj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1529/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1529/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri. S. Sathyaraj, Assistant Commissioner Of No. 13A, Brahadambal Road, V. Income Tax, Nungambakkam, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aafps-6100-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 201(1)Section 205

…ecutors of the Estate of S. Shanmuga Mudaliar vs ACIT & Others in TCA No. 388 of 2008 dated 11.08.2014, wherein the Hon’ble High Court has relied on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Yashpal Sahni vs Rekha Hajarnavis vs ACIT, reported in [2007] 293 ITR 539 (Bom) and the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Ansuya Alva vs DCIT reported in [2005] 278 ITR 206 wherein Court held that, “the facts and circumstances of the above case is similar to the facts of the present case. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the bar under sec. 205 of the Act prevents the department from dema…

Altico Capital India Limited, Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 372/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: The Cit(A) Which Was Dismissed By The Cit(A) Vide Its Order, Dated 13/12/2022. Now The Appellant Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Aforesaid Order Of The Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Snayogita Nagpal
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 205Section 234A

…t treasury and in this regard, the Learned Authorised Representative for the Appellant placed reliance on Section 205 of the Act, Office Memorandum, dated 11/03/2016 and the following judicial precedents – (a) Yashpal Saini v Rekha Hajarnavis and other [2007] 293 ITR 539 [Bom. HC]; (b) Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain v Union of India [2019] 262 Taxman 118 [Bom. HC]; (c) Anusuya Alva v DCIT [2005] 278 ITR 206 [Karnataka HC] Sanjay Sudan v ACIT [2023] 331 CTR 797 [Delhi HC]; and (d) Milan Arvindbhai Patel v ACIT [2023] 455 ITR 82 [Gujarat HC]. Alternatively, it was contended by the Learned Authorised Representative fo…

Shri Amit Prakash Mehta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Comm. of Income Tax, CPC, Mumbai

ITA 2960/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Amit Prakash Mehta, Deputy Commissioner of 9, Akashdeep, Income Tax, Dungarshi Road, Vs. Centralized Processing Walkeshwar, Centre, Mumbai – 400 006 Bangalore – 560100 PAN: AFNPM7986D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R. Date of Hearing : 10 . 01 . 2023 Date of Pronouncement : 19 . 01 . 2023 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: The appe…

Shri Harinder Pal Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 123/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 153ASection 154Section 205Section 250

…XVII, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income. This provision came up for consideration before division bench of this Court in case of Yashpal Sahni v. Rekha Hajarnavis (2007) 293 ITR 539 (BOM). It was a case where the employer while paying salary to the employee had deducted tax at source Rs. 6.66 lakhs. Subsequently, disputes arose between the employer and employee due to which service of the employee was terminated. The employee filed the return of income claiming credit of TDS of Rs. 6.66 lakhs. The Assessing Officer issued in…

Bsr Infratech India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 697/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R
Section 199Section 234ASection 270ASection 43Section 43C

…ITA No.697/Bang/2022 BSR Infratech India Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 BSR Infratech India Ltd. No.851, D Block 15th Cross Deputy Commissioner of Sahakarnagar Income-tax Vs. Bangalore 560 092 Central Circle-2(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AADCB5352J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Madhusudhan, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R. Date of Hearing : 13.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE…

Shri. Amit Prakash Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2144/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 192Section 200Section 201Section 205Section 221Section 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.2144/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2016-17) Amit Prakash Mehta v. DCIT – CPC 9, Akashdeep, Dungarshi Road Bangalore-560100 Walkeshwar,Mumbai-400006 PAN: AFNPM7986D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ravikant Pathak Department by : Shri Manoj Sinha Date of Hearing : 28.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2022 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (JM) The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 30.06.2022 passed by Learned Commissioner o…