“Section 39(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 39Section 39(1)21 judgments

PUSA NANDA KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 154/HYD/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.154/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2007-2008) Sri Pusa Nanda Kumar, The Dcit, Hyderabad - 500001. Central Circle-3(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Acupp6100E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 153ASection 50CSection 68

years' standing could not possibly make the mistake in view of the clear provisions on the subject of appeals existing under Section 39(1) of the Punjab Courts Act and therefore, his advice to file the appeal before the District Court would not come to the rescue of the appellant

MONISH G MAKHIJA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC-5(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6116/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salukhe

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 39(1)Section 40A(3)

business promotion of more than INR 20,000 expenses in cash 2 Assessment Year 2018-2019 (b) Disallowance of INR.11,36,819/- under Section 39(1) of the Act in respect of business promotion expenses incurred through American Express Credit Card holding the same to be personal in nature

KIRAN KANDHARI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-69(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical

ITA 3315/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mahna, Adv. and Shri Mayank Kouts, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 194LSection 39(1)Section 72

1. Because the learned CIT (A) faceless has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that as per the provisions of Section 39(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 the appellant is only required to report the Page 1 of 6 ITA No.- 3315/Del/2024 Kiran Kandhari income

M/S SIKAR ZILLA WELFARE TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 691/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Sikar Zilla Welfare Income Tax Officer, Trust Ward 1(3), Exempt 1A, Sikar Bhawan, Vs. Ashutosh Dey Lane, Kolkata-400071 Kolkata-700006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadts3808D Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gautam Patra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Patra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 39(1)

submitted that the return of income has been filed within M/s Sikar Zilla Welfare Trust; A.Y. 2018-19 the prescribed time limit under Section 39(1) of the Act. Though, the audit was duly carried out by the auditors before filing of return of income, but due to technical glitches

DOCTOR PUNJABRAO DESHMUKH KRUSHI VIDYAPEETH KARAMCHARI PAT SANSTHA MRYAT ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AKOLA

ITA 331/NAG/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Jun 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 80ASection 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

INCOME TAX OFFICER W 1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1166/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, VIJAYANAGAR vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 HASSAN, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONGS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY & SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1163/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

M/S. S. RAMASHANDRA SETTY & SONS,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1156/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

RAHUL RANJIT BHAT,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. DIT CPC-INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1340/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Return Of Income As Per Rule 128(9) Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 In The Adjustment Made U/S.143(1).

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 39(1)Section 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

MUKESH PATHAK,TONK ROAD vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT , ITO WARD6(2)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 294/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271FSection 39(1)

confirming penalty amounting to Rs.5,000/- u/s 271F whereas the assessee was not required to file his return of income as per Section 39(1). 2 MUKESH PATHAK VS ITO, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR 2. That the NFAC has further erred in law and facts in confirming tax Rs.311/- imposed

APCER LIFE SCIENCES INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2882/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Apcer Life Sciences India Limited Assessing Officer G-040, Vikas Centre, 104, S V Road, National E-Assessment Centre, Vs. Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 Delhi

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 156Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Apcer

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MANISH VIJAY MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 494/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR

Section 148

received outside India to be utilized as evidence should be duly authenticated. The same is applicable even for Income Tax Act as per section 39(1) 'As per Section 39 of The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, where any document is produced or furnished by any person or has been

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MANISH VIJAY MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 493/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR

Section 148

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. URVI MANISH MEHRA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 492/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR

Section 148

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. URVI MANISH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 491/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR

Section 148

M/S JAYSONS INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 403/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K

M/S JAYSONS INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 402/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K

SHARDHA NAND SHARMA,FARIDABAD vs. ITD, CPC, BENGALURU

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1140/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad[Assessment Year : 2018-19) & [Assessment Year : 2019-20)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

ACIT in ITA No. 850/Del/2021 dated 29/10/2021 submitted that the Bench considered the amendment made by Finance Act, 2021 inserting Explanation 2 to Section 39(1)((va) and held that the amendment with apply only from Assessment Year 2021-22 and subsequent years as it was inserted with effect from

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2