“section 143(1) intimation”

M/S. BAKSHI SECURITY AND PERSONNEL SERVICES P. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 12(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Bakshi Security & Personnel Income Tax Officer– 12(1)(1), Services P. Ltd., Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Unit No.234/235, Mumbai Benches, 101 Maharishi New Sonal Link Industrial Estate, Vs. Karve Marg, Buildg 02, Link Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Malad West, Mumbai- 400064 Pan: Aaacb3456A (Appellant) : (Respondent)

more so when the Ld. AO in the scrutiny assessment commences the proceeding with the income determined by the CPC in the section 143(1) intimation. Further, we place reliance in the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in the case Innovsource 5 M/s. Bakshi Security & Personnel Services

THE NAVAL DOCKYARD CO OP BANK LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanthe Naval Dockyard Co- Vs. Dcit Circle1(3)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Op Bank Limited Mumbai-400 020 Shahid Bhagat Singh Road Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Pan/Gir No. Aabat7232R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Jayesh Kala, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 आदेश / Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm:

means there is no tax effect or adverse impact, rendering the appeal moot. The appellant's grievances primarily relate to the Section 143(1) intimation, which was superseded by the Section 143(3) order. As noted in the ITAT's decision, the appellant failed to avail remedies such as filing ... rectification application under Section 154 or an appeal against the Section 143(1) intimation. The following table summarizes the key financial figures and their implications: Description Amount (Rs.) Remarks Returned Income 55,52,467 Declared by the appellant in the filed return. Section 143(1) Adjusted 79,48,179 Includes

TASKUS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2022-23 M/S Taskus India Pvt. Ltd., 1. Dy. Director Of Income- Ttc Industrial Area, Tower -9, Tax Central Processing Vs. Gigaplex It Park, 18Th & 19Th Centre Unit, Bengaluru, Floor, Midc, Plot No. 1 I.T.5, 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha Airoli Knowledge Park Rd, Airoli, No 48/1, 48/2 Navi Mumbai-400708. Beratenaagrahara Begur Hosur Rd Uttarahali Hobli, Bengaluru- 560100. 2. The Dy. Cit, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahct 0980 G Appellant Respondent

failed to appreciate that has failed to appreciate that the adjustment made by the CPC the adjustment made by the CPC in section 143(1) intimation does not specify the clause/ sub in section 143(1) intimation does not specify the clause/ sub in section 143(1) intimation does

AXIS CARRIERS AND LOGISTICS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 14(1)(1) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Axis Carriers & Logistics Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 803, B Kukreja Palace, Vallabh Baug Tax, 14(1)(1) Lane, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai – Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, 400075. Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aadca9585A (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Rakesh Milwani Respondent By : Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, It Is Submitted That Once An Order Is Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter, For The Sake Of Brevity, Referred To As "The Act'), The Intimation Of Processing Of Return Of Income U/S 143(1) Of The Act Ceases To Be In Force & Cannot Be Acted Upon Having Merged With Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Therefore Additions Made While Processing Return Of Income Cease To Exist Once Order Is Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & The Additions Made To The Income U/S 143(1) Of The Act & Demands Raised Thereon Ought To Be Deleted. Axis Carriers & Logistics Ltd.

merger would not be applicable in the present case, where the ld. AO has not dealt with the same issue in the Section 143(1) intimation. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 9. In the above facts, the only issue that

MSC AGENCY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2)(2) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Private Limited vs. ACIT 20. The ld. AR before us contended that addition on profit on sale of fixed assets was made in Section 143(1) intimation which according to the ld. AR has already been reduced by the assessee in the fixed assets. The ld. AR contended that ... other hand controverted the said fact and stated that the assessee ought to have filed an appeal against Section 143(1) intimation and cannot challenged the same in an appeal against the Section143(3) order. 22. On perusal of the rival contentions, it is observed that

MSC AGENCY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2)(2) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Private Limited vs. ACIT 20. The ld. AR before us contended that addition on profit on sale of fixed assets was made in Section 143(1) intimation which according to the ld. AR has already been reduced by the assessee in the fixed assets. The ld. AR contended that ... other hand controverted the said fact and stated that the assessee ought to have filed an appeal against Section 143(1) intimation and cannot challenged the same in an appeal against the Section143(3) order. 22. On perusal of the rival contentions, it is observed that

MSC AGENCY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Private Limited vs. ACIT 20. The ld. AR before us contended that addition on profit on sale of fixed assets was made in Section 143(1) intimation which according to the ld. AR has already been reduced by the assessee in the fixed assets. The ld. AR contended that ... other hand controverted the said fact and stated that the assessee ought to have filed an appeal against Section 143(1) intimation and cannot challenged the same in an appeal against the Section143(3) order. 22. On perusal of the rival contentions, it is observed that

M/S ALUBOUND DACS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Alubound Dacs India Private Dy. Cit, Circle-6(1)(1) Limited Mumbai 301, T V Industrial Estate, Vs. Behind Glaxo, Ahire Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 030

where the assessee has raised the contention that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the said ground. It is observed that against section 143(1) intimation the assessee has filed the rectification application u/s.154 of the Act before the ld. A.O. which is pending for disposal. It is evident