“gross total income”

Chapter VI - Deductions / Set-offSection 80B(5)Section 80B(5) / Rule 3D2,282 judgments

The decision most relied on for gross total income is CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State (200 Taxmann 220), cited in 348 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on gross total income

CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State

200 Taxmann 220 · 2011 · High Court

348

citing judgments

Interest earned by a Co-operative Society from investing fixed deposits in banks is entitled to a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

391 ITR 274 · 2017 · Supreme Court

290

citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A or 10AA of the Income-tax Act is computed on the profits of the eligible unit without first setting off losses from other units or non-eligible units. Conversely, losses incurred by an eligible unit are allowed to be set off against the assessee's other taxable business profits.

ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT

343 ITR 89 · 2012 · Supreme Court

144

citing judgments

For calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC, if total interest is netted off after adjusting interest paid and received, the 90% reduction specified in Explanation (baa) is not applicable.

Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer (IT) & Another

299 ITR 444 · 2008 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

When computing deductions under Chapter VI-A, such as Section 80IA, losses from other business undertakings must be set off against the profits of the eligible undertaking before calculating the deduction. No deduction under Section 80IA is permissible if the overall 'Profits & Gains of Business or Profession' results in a loss.

CIT v. Himatasingike Seide Ltd.

286 ITR 255 · 2006 · High Court

citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act is to be allowed only after setting off unabsorbed depreciation and brought forward business losses against the profits of the business.

CIT v. Williamson Financial Services

165 Taxmann 638 · 2007 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Income-tax is levied on the total income of an assessee, not on gross receipts. The tax is on income, and deductions for expenditure are permissible.

CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited

127 Taxmann.com 69 · 2021 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Deduction under Section 80-IA or 80-IB is computed by setting it off against the gross total income to arrive at the total income of an assessee.

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd.

328 ITR 448 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

Deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, such as Section 80-IA, are to be calculated and allowed with reference to the assessee's gross total income, not just business income.

Judgments citing gross total income

Kona Seema Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. CPC, Bangalore, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2024/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ashish A. ThakurdesaiFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Choughule

Section 143(1)Section 2(19)Section 234ASection 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

section Kona Seema Co–operative Housing Society Ltd. ITA no.2024/Mum./2023 (2) to section 80P of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under the Maharashtra

Sureprep (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5855/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.2243/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2009-10) आअसं.5523/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.5855/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2011-12) M/S. Sureprep (India) Private Limited, 4Th Floor, Dhantak Plaza, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 034. Pan: Aahcs-9039-H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(3)(2), 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti Shah "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2023 आदेश आदेश/ Order आदेश आदेश Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical. The Appeal Of Assessee For Assessment Year 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’ ], Dated 02/01/2013

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &

Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

exercise to be undertaken under Chapter VI of the Act for arriving at the total income of the assessee from the gross total income. The somewhat discordant use of the expression "total income of the assessee" in Section 10A has already been dealt with earlier and in the overall scenario ... order, by holding that though Section 10A, as amended, is a provision for deduction, the stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter

Sureprep (India)P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5523/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &

Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

Sureprep (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2243/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah & Ms. Arti ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande &

Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(3)Section 1O

Bsc C&C Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-61(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2283/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 801A(4)(i)Section 80I

That on the facts and in law in the final order of assessment, the AO has erred in computing the Gross Total Income after taking into effect loss of Rs. 13,65,60,299/- as declared by the appellant in the Revised Computation of Income (filed during assessment proceedings ... With regard to the deduction u/s 80-LA, we have to submit as follows: Section 80-IA: (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived by an undertaking or an enterprise from any business referred to in sub-section (4) (such business being

Kinjal Heaven Co Operative Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-19(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2955/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 2955, 2956, 2957 & 2958/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Kinjal Heaven Vs. Ito,Ward19(2)(2), Cooperative Society Ltd, Piramal Chambers, 1St Wadia Street, 5Th Floor, Near Mumbai-400034. Bharatmata Theatre, Parel (East), Mumbai-400012. Pan/Gir No. : Aacak6843Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Rajesh Shah.Ar Respondent By : Shri.G.J.Ninawe. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 06.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec250 Of The Act For The A.Y 2017-18 & For The A.Y 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Passed U/S 143(1) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri.Rajesh Shah.ARFor Respondent: Shri.G.J.Ninawe. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

adjudication of the issue before us. "80P(2) (d) (1). Where in the case of an assessee being a co- operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section

ITO, Thane vs. Rajendra Hastimal Mehta, Thane

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

ITA 2400/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleito, Ward – 2(1), Vs. Shri Rajendrahastimal Room No. 25, B-Wing Mehta (Huf), 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park Flat No.101/102, Wagle Industrial Estate, C-62, Sector-5, Shanti Thane (W)-400604, Nagar, Mira Road (E), Maharashtra. Thane-401107, Maharashtra. Pan/Gir No. : Aaahr4446M Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Rajendra.H.Mehta.ARFor Respondent: Shri .G.J. Ninawe.Sr. DR

gains/loss on the share transactions.The return of income was filed by the assessee in compliance to notice U/sec148 of the Act disclosing a gross total income of Rs.154,741/- and after claiming the deduction u/sec Chapter VIA of Rs. 99,696/- and the total income was determined of Rs.55

Blue Rose Industrial Premises Co-Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 2227/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryblue Rose Industrial Premises Cit(A), Co-Op. Society Limited Nfac, 43, Blue Rose Industrial Delhi-110 001 Premises Co-Op. Society Limited Vs. Wester Express Highway, Borivali (E), Mumbai-400 068

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Smitha V. Nair, Ld. DR

Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Housing Society. Thus, if any income as referred to in sub-section (2) to section 80P of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under

Sureprep (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 8818/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 32(2)

exemption. Post amendment, provisions of section 10A had become deduction provisions. The said deduction would be allowed to the assessee while computing gross total income of eligible undertaking under Chapter-IV of the Act. The decision in the case of CIT vs. Himatasingike Seide Ltd. (supra) pertains to the assessment ... exercise to be undertaken under Chapter VI of the Act for arriving at the total income of the assessee from the gross total income. The somewhat discordant use of the expression "total income of the assessee" in Section 10A has already been dealt with earlier and in the overall scenario

Innovatiview India Private Limited, Noida vs. ACIT Circle 10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1081/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date & Has Wrongly Applied Provision Of Sec 143(1) & Section 2(24)(X) Read M/S Innovatiview India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

assessee received intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act (‘Act’ for short) assessing the gross total income of the assessee at Rs. 1,81,99,123/- by making addition of Rs. 6,44,998/- as per Section 36(1)(va) of the Act on the ground that

Cabot Technology Solution Private Limited, Kochi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi-1, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is disposed of on the afore-stated terms

ITA 609/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Oct 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dascabot Technology Solutions Principal Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax – 1 204, 2Nd Floor, Lulu Cyber Tower Vs. Cr Building , Is Press Infopark, Kochi 682042 Road, Kochi 682018 [Pan:Aadcc 9320K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Allen Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, Cit- D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Revision Of It’S Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 20.12.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Act (Pr. Cit), Vide His Order Dated 18.01.2022. 2.1 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Company In Software Development Business, Returned, For The Relevant Year, An Income Of Rs.3,67,574 Under The Regular Provisions Of The Act & A Book-Profit Of Rs.14,33,474 U/S.115Jb Of The Act, Paying The Higher Tax On The Latter. The Same Was Subject To Regular Assessment, Determining The Income Under The Regular Provisions At Rs. 8,10,750 & At The Returned Book-Profit Under Mat Provisions. The Assessment Record Was Subsequently Examined By The Learned Pr. Cit In Exercise Of His Revisionary

For Appellant: Shri Allen Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, CIT- D.R

Section 10ASection 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

income, even if regarded as furnished in response to the said notice, inasmuch as the deduction claimed u/s.10AA is on the entire gross total income, it ought to, but is not, accompanied by a statement to the effect that the same does not include any income from the Thevara, Kochi

SHI vs. Amruddhi Nagari Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 2225/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Smitha V. Nair, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 2(24)(viia)Section 250Section 5Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

Housing Society. Thus, if any income as referred to in sub- section (2) to section 80P of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under

SHI vs. Amruddhi Nagari Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 2224/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Smitha V. Nair, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 2(24)(viia)Section 250Section 5Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

Housing Society. Thus, if any income as referred to in sub- section (2) to section 80P of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under

SHI vs. Amruddhi Nagari Sahakari Patasanstha Maryadit, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 2223/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Smitha V. Nair, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 2(24)(viia)Section 250Section 5Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

Housing Society. Thus, if any income as referred to in sub- section (2) to section 80P of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under

Income Tax Officer-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Sohni Depak Tanna, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2245/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm C.O.No. 135/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Assessee By : Shri. Madhur Agrawal & Pankaj Jain Revenue By : Shri. Kishor Dhule Date Of Hearing: 03.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal & PankajFor Respondent: Shri. Kishor Dhule

Section 10Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 68

income tax return (ITR – 4) filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014 – 15. It is seen that the assessee had declared gross total income of ₹ 9,042,894/- for assessment year 2014 – 15 with nature of income as professional income. The profit and loss account indicates sales/income

Sewa Sahkari Sammittee Maryadit, Beed, Mundi Khandwa vs. PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed

ITA 44/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisewa Sahkari Sammittee Pr. Cit-2 Maryadit Beed Indore Vs. Beed Mundi Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaufs0703N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

Section 12ASection 138Section 143(3)Section 263

assessment order as under: “1.The return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 was filed on 20-11-2016 declaring gross total income of Rs.1,08,534/- and after claiming deduction chapter VIA [under Section 80P] of Income Tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 1,08,534/-, declaring total income

Supreme Buildestates Pvt Ltd, Madanganj- Kishangarh vs. DCIT Circle 2 Ajmer, Jaipur Road Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 495/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 2Section 234BSection 37Section 80Section 80G

expenses the assessee has claimed 50% of CSR expenses of Rs. 17,16,540/ out of Rs.34,33,080 i.e. 10% of adjusted Gross total income other than Long term Capital- Rs. 3,43,30,803/- as donations to Shri Ratanlal Kanwar Lal Patni Foundation under section ... time of filing return of income. Further, the appellant had claimed a deduction of Rs.17,16,540/- (50% of 10% of Adjusted Gross Total Income other than Long Term Capital Gain) u/s 80G(5) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 as the CSR donation was made to approved charitable trust

Apm Terminals India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.1 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed, holding that the assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is barred by limitation and hence quashed

ITA 2511/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharishi, Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailsandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri Manish Kant and DeveshFor Respondent: Pravin D Salunkhe, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 80ISection 92C

repairs and transportation of containers. It filed its return of income on 30/11/2018, declaring total income at Rs. Nil and having the gross total income of Rs.53,58,65,908/–, which was claimed as a deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Later on, the return of income was revised

Shri Vaishnav Plolytechnic College Govn by vs. K Market Tech Education Society, Indorevs.the CIT-CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 356/IND/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Vaishnav Polytechnic Dcit, Cpc College, Governed By Vsk Bangalore Vs. Technical Education Society (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aafts9636P Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri V. Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .10.2023

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 57

Rental income 148200 148200 INCOME FROM OTHERS Sales of tender forms fee 23020 27689329 27712349 27712349 VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS 53950000 53950000 Grant from Government GROSS TOTAL INCOME 86567 Less : Deductions / Exemtions claimed u/s 11 a) Amount applied to charitable or religious purpose in India during the previous year Revenue Account ... GROSS TOTAL INCOME (LOSS) (-)7612 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. CALCULATION OF TAX Tax on Total Income NIL Less: Tax deducted/collected t source from Interest 3839 Rent 27467 Professional Services 8400 (-) 39706 Net Tax Refundable (Subject to interest u/s 244A) (-) 39 Rounded off (-) 39 6. As apparent from the computation of income the assesse claimed

Bikaner Seva Sangh, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1611/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalbikaner Seva Sangh 28/30, Anantwadi, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai- 400002, Pan: Aaatb3552G ...... Appellant Vs. Cit (Exem.) 601, Mtnl Building, Peddar Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400026 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Narayan Atal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Ld. DR

Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

mention here that an order u / s 143(1) was passed in this case by the CPC on 01.10.2019 in which the gross total income of the assessee is considered as Rs. 37,13,576/- for the year under consideration without allowing deductions of amount ... follows:- 3 Bikaner Seva Sangh "An order u/s 143(1) was passed in your case by the CPC on 01.10.2019 in which your gross total income is considered as Rs. 37,13,576/- for the year under consideration. In this regard, you are required to show cause why your gross