← All Phrases

“Section 127(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 127Section 127(3)35 judgments

ONUS PLANTATIONS AND AGRO LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5004/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16
Section 127(2)(a)Section 127(3)Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 68Section 69C

{ "clean_text": "ITA No.5004/Del/2025\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI \"A\" BENCH: NEW DELHI\nBEFORE SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

G S AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 4289/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmang.S. Automobiles Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 6, B – 26, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase Ii, Delhi. Delhi – 110 020. (Pan : Aadcg1150B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Neeraj Mangla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Order : 30.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi – 24 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 19.06.2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That The Orders Passed By Ld. Ao U/S 153C Of The Act As Well As Appellate Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A) Are Bad In Law & Are Passed In Contravention Of Prevailing Law As Well As Facts Of The Case, Therefore Liable To Be Annulled. 2. That Assumption Of Jurisdiction Of Ld. Ao In Consequence Of Order Passed By Ld. Pcit U/S 127(3) Of The Act Of The Act Is Illegal & Not Tenable Under The Law Because Of Said Order Being Mechanical & Being Passed

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Mangla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 127(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI

GANGES TIEUP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2570/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ganges Tieup Pvt. Ltd. Ito Ward 9(1), 127, 1St Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Netaji Subhash Road, Kolkata-700069, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecg6645G Assessee By : S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Pranabesh Sarkar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2025

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 120Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Therefore, since it has been held in this judgment that it is imperative on part of the respondents to issue order under section 127(3), the letters/notices under challenge are set aside and quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Consequential proceedings are also set aside and quashed. Accordingly, the notice

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(2), NEW DELHI vs. ADVENTURE RESORTS AND CRUISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal as well Assessee’s cross objection both are dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 5877/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhdcit, Circle 1(2), Vs.Adventure Resorts Room No. 368, C.R. Building & Cruises Pvt. Ltd. I.P. Estate, New Delhi 611, Surya Kiran Building, Kg Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan:Aaacf6111G) (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.198/Del/2022 (Asstt. Year : 2014-15) Adventure Resorts Vs. Dcit, Circle 1(2) & Cruises Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 611, Surya Kiran Building, Kg Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan: Aaacf6111G) (Appellant) (Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By :Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.09.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee through speed post (the copy of the notice and delivery status of the notice is attached as attachment). Further, as per section 127(3) of the Act, there is no requirement of passing of order u/s. 127(1) of the Act, for transferring the case from any Assessing Officer

DCIT-CC-6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. SUSHILKUMAR SUBHASHRAO DESHMUKH, PUNE

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

ITA 2025/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaradcit-Cc-6(1), Mumbai Vs Sushilkumar Subhashrao Deshmukh, Room No.445, 4Th Floor, B.K.C., 1194/9, Flat No.2, Subashri Society, Bandra, Mumbai Ghole Road, Pune-4110 005 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Manish SomaniFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar
Section 124Section 127Section 127(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 46A

under the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. Section 127(1) empowers the Commissioner to transfer cases between Assessing Officers subordinate to them, and Section 127(3) relaxes the requirement of providing an opportunity of being heard for transfers within the same city. The Revenue Department argues that intra-range transfers ... core issue pertains to the change of jurisdiction in the context of an inter-city transfer. The learned Ld. DR contended that Section 127(3) of the Act, empowers the revenue to effect an inter-city transfer without issuing a formal order, and that the Commissioner of Income

NANDLAL COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer, Nandlal Commercial Private Ward 3(1), Kolkata Limited, Kolkata Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 1, Mahendra Nath Roy, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Bye Lane, Kolkata-711101, Kolkata-700069 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcn2898K Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, DR
Section 120Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 68

Therefore, since it has been held in this judgment that it is imperative on part of the respondents to issue order under section 127(3), the letters/notices under challenge are set aside and quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Consequential proceedings are also set aside and quashed. Accordingly, the notice

HEMKUNT FOUNDATIONS,GURUGRAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) -1, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 631/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 & Stay Application No.329Del/2024 ( In Ita No. 631/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Hemkunt Foundations, Vs. Principal Commissioner Plot No.809, Second Floor, Income Tax, Rd 42, Sector 42, Central-1, Gurugram, Haryana New Delhi Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaath8443C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, SumitFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Agarwal, Special Counsel and Shivansh Pandya, Jr. Standing
Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(2)Section 80G

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL

VEER PROJECT,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 332/RPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 332/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 127(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

order u/s 143(3) of the Act passed by the assessing officer dated 20/12/2019 is without valid jurisdiction in accordance with section 127(3) of the Act and liable to be quashed. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases

BHAN BAI, BHILAI,DURG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Bhan Bai H. No.257, Risali Basti, Newai Mill Para, Bhilai-490 006 (C.G.) Pan: Ayrpb7895B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 271(1)(c)

offices of all such officers are situated in the same city, locality or place.” (Emphasis supplied ) From a reading of the language of section 127(3) it is evident that when a file is transferred from one assessing officer to another whose offices are located in the same city, locality ... Therefore, since it has been held in this judgement that it is imperative on part of the respondents to issue order under section 127(3), the letters/notices under challenge are set aside and quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Consequential proceedings are also set aside and quashed. Accordingly, the notice

NISHA BAHETI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1199/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Nisha Baheti C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Acit, Cir-11(2), Advocates 2, Garstin Place, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Chowringhee Square, Vs. Hare Street, Kolkata-700001, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahmpb0320M Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Roma Chaudhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Roma Chaudhary, DR
Section 10(38)Section 127(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Therefore, since it has been held in this judgment that it is imperative on part of the respondents to issue order under section 127(3), the letters/notices under challenge are set aside and quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Consequential proceedings are also set aside and quashed. Accordingly, the notice

RAHUL TYAGI,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 113/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.113/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Rahul Tyagi Golden Homes 13, New Vip Club, Shankar Nagar, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aitpt6198H

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 124(1)Section 124(3)(a)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

DOLPHIN PROMOTERS AND BUILDERS,RAIPUR vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 58/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 58/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Vimal KumarFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 68Section 801B(10)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं

SHRI SUBHASH CHOTAMAL AGARWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 679/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI SUBHASH CHOTAMAL AGARWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 678/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI RAKESH SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 677/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI RAKESH SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 676/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI RAKESH SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 675/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI PAWAN SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 674/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI PAWAN SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 673/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

SHRI PAWAN SUBHASH AGRAWAL,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 672/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Mr Ravish Maniyar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 253(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2