“Section 143(1)(a)(iv)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)(iv)322 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1)(a)(iv) is CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (332 ITR 167), cited in 897 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)(a)(iv)

CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.

332 ITR 167 · 2011 · High Court

897

citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 merely because the assessment order does not explicitly reflect an inquiry, or because the Commissioner holds a different opinion. An inquiry, even if considered inadequate, or an assessment based on a plausible view by the Assessing Officer after due examination, does not automatically make the order erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

227 ITR 172 · 1997 · Supreme Court

621

citing judgments

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

ITO v. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd.

343 ITR 329 · 2012 · High Court

438

citing judgments

For exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 263, the Commissioner must first find that the Assessing Officer's order is erroneous and unsustainable in law, as this is a condition precedent. An order is not erroneous merely because two views are possible, or if the Commissioner disagrees with the Assessing Officer's permissible view, or to simply remit the matter for further enquiries.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court

363

citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT

177 ITR 377 · 1989 · Supreme Court

275

citing judgments

Expenditure that provides a commercial advantage of an enduring nature may still be classified as revenue expenditure if its purpose is to facilitate existing trading operations, improve business efficiency, or upgrade existing products, depending on the specific context and objective.

CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd.

222 ITR 344 · 1996 · Supreme Court

223

citing judgments

Unclaimed deposits received in the course of trading transactions and sundry credit balances written back are taxable as business income under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as they constitute a cessation of trading liability.

CIT v. Sohana Woollen Mills

296 ITR 238 · 2008 · High Court

180

citing judgments

A mere audit objection, by itself, is insufficient to infer that an Assessing Officer's order is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue for the purpose of initiating revisional proceedings.

CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

404 ITR 1 · 2018 · Supreme Court

164

citing judgments

The waiver of a loan taken for acquiring capital assets is considered a capital receipt and is not taxable as income under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act. The ruling distinguishes between the waiver of trading liabilities and capital liabilities for tax purposes.

Judgments citing Section 143(1)(a)(iv)

Ashvira Industires LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT-23 (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 1523/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ryan SaldanhaFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

DCIT [(2021) 133 taxmann.com 84 (Del)]. In addition, the Ld. Authorised Representative of the Appellant also submitted that the provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) are not attracted in the facts of the present case as the tax auditor had only given details require in tax audit report ... Finance Act, 2021. He submitted that the addition/adjustment squarely falls within the ambit of the provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submission as well as the order passed by the CIT(A). It is admitted position that employees contribution

Vishal & Co, Mumbai vs. CPC Itd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 31/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, DR

Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 44Section 44A

Kalpesh Synthetics P Limited V DCIT [2022] 137 taxmann.com 475 (Mumbai - Trib.) [27-04-2022] and held that 07. The adjustments under section 143(1)(a)(iv) in respect of "disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income

Vishal & Co, Mumbai vs. DCIT Centralised Processing Centre, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, DR

Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 44Section 44A

Global Waste Management Cell P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

ITA 139/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

Bangalore, [2022] 137 taxmann.com 475 (Mumbai - Trib.)[27-04-2022] wherein it has been held that :- The adjustments under section 143(1)(a)(iv) in respect of "disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return

Global Waste Management Cell P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tas Department, Bengaluru

ITA 138/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

M/S. Global Waste Management Cell P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Centralised Processing Center, Bengaluru

ITA 137/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

Geetee Travels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1778/MUM/2021[AY 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm The Commissioner Of Income Geetee Travels Private Limited Tax (Appeals) Shop No.1, Satellite Bldg, Opp National Faceless Appeal Mistry, Complex Om Nagar, Vs. Centre, Andheri, Mumbai-400 099 Delhi (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaccg7462R Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Sonia Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sonia Kumar, DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

Centre, Income Tax Department to the tune of Rs. 7,92,353 without referring to the specific provisions of adjustment contained in section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act. Appellant submits relevant clause 20(b) of Audit Report in Form 3CD nowhere requires Auditor to report disallowance in clause ... that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, after going through the provision of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act together with clause 20(b) of Form 3CD, mo adjustment can be made for belated payment of PF & ESIC dues

M/S. Meremma Basavaraj Belli, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengalure

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 685/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

justifications enough for any disallowance of expenditure under the Act? As we deal with this question, we are alive to the fact section 143(1)(a)(iv) specifically an adjustment in respect of “disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total ... contentions in this regard that the observations made in the tax audit report, in the light of the specific provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv), must prevail- more so when the tax auditor is appointed by the assessee himself, is clearly unsustainable in law. While Section 143(1

Axis Carriers and Logistics Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh MilwaniFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Shri Tejindersingh S Anand, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 579/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Mumbai District Central Co Op Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 429/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

justifications enough for any disallowance of expenditure under the Act? As we deal with this question, we are alive to the fact section 143(1)(a)(iv) specifically an adjustment in respect of ―disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total ... contentions in this regard that the observations made in the tax audit report, in the light of the specific provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv), must prevail- more so when the tax auditor is appointed by the assessee himself, is clearly unsustainable in law. While Section 143(1

Chandresh Cabels Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Mumbai

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

ITA 418/MUM/2022[2019-202]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2019-202

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Chandresh Cables Ltd. ITA No.418/Mum./2022 expenditure under the Act? As we deal with this question, we are alive to the fact section 143(1)(a)(iv) specifically an adjustment in respect of “disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total ... contentions in this regard that the observations made in the tax audit report, in the light of the specific provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv), must prevail- more so when the tax auditor is appointed by the assessee himself, is clearly unsustainable in law. While Section 143(1

Brillpharma Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 414/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Ruchi TamhankarFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

M/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 240/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Shiv Sagar Restaurant Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 2442/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshiv Sagar Restaurant Vs. A.O.,Cpc Pvt Ltd,Dharam Prem Bangalore, Apartments,Nehru Road, Karnataka-560500 Vile Parle(East) Mumbai-400057 Pan/Gir No. : Aabcs1285M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Jigar Sangani.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Samruddhi Hande.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter ‘The Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Jigar Sangani.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Samruddhi Hande.DR

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

taking into account in the computation of total income in the return” as is sine qua non for disallowance of Section 143(1)(a)(iv). When the due date under Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) is judicially held to be not decisive for determining the disallowance in the computation ... 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, or when no findings were to be given on the scope of permissible adjustments under section 143(1)(a)(iv). That is not the situation before us. We, therefore, see no need to deal with that aspect of the matter at this stage

Atlas Castalloy Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(1) (2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1505/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai25 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: The Due Date For Filing Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev V. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40a

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Atlas

Aura Facilities Management Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore - CPC

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1429/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar RuthalaFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed by the CIT(A) placing reliance on the provisions contained in Section 143(1)(a)(iv) read with Section 36(1)(va) of the Act holding as under: “4.2 Findings 4.2.1 Before adverting to the facts of the instant case ... knowledge of CIT(A). In addition to the above, the Ld. Authorised Representative of the Appellant also submitted that the provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) are not attracted in the ITA. No. 1429/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 facts of the present case as the tax auditor had only

Dicitex Home Furnishing Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 1 (3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1715/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc) & Could Be Allowed As Deduction.

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

justifications enough for any disallowance of expenditure under the Act? As we deal with this question, we are alive to the fact section 143(1)(a)(iv) specifically an adjustment in respect of "disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total ... contentions in this regard that the observations made in the tax audit report, in the light of the specific provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv), must prevail- more so when the tax auditor is appointed by the assessee himself, is clearly unsustainable in law. While Section 143(1

Ramesh Narayan Shetty, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 80/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, or when no findings were to be given on the scope of permissible adjustments under section 143(1)(a)(iv). That is not the situation before us. We, therefore, see no need to deal with that aspect of the matter at this stage

Ramesh Narayan Shetty, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 79/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B