“Section 139(9)”

Shanay Jhaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO-It-3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

return on 8.2.2019 for rectifying an error in TAN of TDS credit claimed by it. Thereafter, the assessee received a defect notice under section 139(9) of the Act from the CPC stating that there is mismatch in the income returned in the return of income and Form No. 26AS

Nihil Naranbhai Desai, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer WD 32(2) (40, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalnihil Naranbhai Desai, Arun Sahu & Associates, Chartered Accountants, B24B, Ground Floor, Borivali Vyomesh Chs, Usha Nagar, Borivali Gymkhana Road, Borivali West, Mumbai-400092. Pan: Abzpd3758J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward-32(2)(4), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. ..... Respondent

circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. Appellate Authority – Commissioner Appeal has erred in not allowing defective return declared under section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Income tax Officer as an Valid Return. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed ... other proceeding is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act.] 8. Provisions of section 139(9) r.w.s. 292B are relevant in the present appeal. A bare reading of the provisions of section 292B makes it clear that a return

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (E)-1 (1), Mumbai-400026 vs. M/S Guru Nanak Vidyak Society, Mumbai-400037

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaldy.Cit (Exemption)-1(1), 6Th Floor, Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill Dr. Gd Deshmukh Marg, (Padder Road), Mumbai- 400026. ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Guru Nanak Vidyak Society, Ground Floor, Guru Tesh Bahadur Nagar, Sion Koliwada, Sion Koliwada, Mumbai-400037. Pan: Aaatg2095D ..... Respondent Appellant/Revenue By : Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Cit-Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Sh. Priyank Ghia & Kanu Chokshi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/12/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’] Vide Order Dated 29.03.2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Condonation For Return Of Income When Only

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Shri Hirachand Javerchand Jain, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Hirachand Javerchand Jain Dcit Cc-4(2) 15, Dadi Seth Agairy Lane, Room No.-655, 6Th Floor, Kalbadevi, Mumbai- 400 002 Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan No. Aadpj3101C Appellant Respondent

9 Shri Hirachand Javerchand Jain duty of the Assessing Officer to bring to the notice of the assessee as prescribed under section 139(9) of the Act holding it as a defective return and having not done so by the Assessing Officer, it can be presumed that he had accepted

Renaissance Services Bv, Mumbai vs. DCIT (International Tax) 4(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalrenaissance Services Bv, C/O Marriott Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. 303A, 304, Fulcrum, B-Wing, Hiranandani Business Park, Sahar Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400099 Pan: Aaecr4995E ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)-4(1)(1), 17Th Floor, Room No. 1712, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 ..... Respondent

schedules, to arrive at the taxable total income. Hence, the return of income is regarded as defective, as provided in Explanation (a) under section 139(9)". The assessee filed reply to the said notice on 07.10.2018 stating that "Assessee is a foreign company and has received payments from Indian hotels

M/S. G M Fabrics P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -9(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S G.M. Fabrics P. Ltd. Dy. Cit Ground Floor, -9(3)(2) Dhana Singh Compound, Room No. 418, 4Th Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Jb Nagar, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 058 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach 2821 F

February 2017, notice was issued to the assessee holding that the return of income filed on 17 October 2016 is defective under Section 139(9) of the Act for the reason that the income appearing in the profit and loss account did not match with relevant schedule of the return ... this income tax return was invalidated by filing portal. G.M. Fabrics Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 16-17 According to provisions of Section 139 (9) of the act provides that where the AO considers that the return of income furnished by the assessee is defective, such defects may be intimated

Atul Dushyant Lall, Mumbai vs. ITO 34 (1) (2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

total income at Rs. 37,98,870. Thereafter, the assessee revised the said return of income on 02/05/2019, pursuant to notice issued under section 139(9) of the Act issued on 05/04/2019. In the return of income filed in response to notice issued under 139(9

Santosh Dnyaneshwar Chavan, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO WD 22(3)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

thus, the same is binding on us. At this stage, it is also pertinent to note the provisions of Explanation (f) to section 139(9) of the Act, which reads as under: “(f) where regular books of account are not maintained by the assessee, the return is accompanied

M/S Rahul Raj Estates Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. PCIT, Central - 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

M/S Rahul Raj Estates Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. PCIT, Central - 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Patel & Associates, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Patel & Associates, Dcit Cc-7(3), Office No. 1, 2Nd Floor, Patel Vs. Aayakarbhavan, Bhuvan, 29 Vijay Wad, Dr Mumbai-400020. Nagindas N Shah Lane Chirasazar, Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aanfm 8145 P Appellant Respondent

return of income on 25/10/2017, which was found defective and the assessee rectified Patel & Associates 4 the defect and filed the return under section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) on 01/03/2018 declaring total income at ₹21,82,660/-. The return of income filed

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER