← All Phrases

“miscellaneous application”

AppealsSection 254(2)Section 254(2)1,501 judgments

The decision most relied on for miscellaneous application is 254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (295 ITR 466), cited in 35 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on miscellaneous application

254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT
295 ITR 466 · 2007 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record that prejudices a party is rectifiable under section 254(2) of the Act.

CIT v. Birla Janahit Trust
208 ITR 372 · 1994 · High Court
17
citing judgments

Expenditure on salaries and miscellaneous expenses for carrying out the trust's objectives is considered an application of income for charitable purposes. Liabilities for employee benefits, such as gratuity and leave encashment, are accrued liabilities even if payable in the future.

Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Director, Health Services
10 SCC 136 · 2013 · Reported
12
citing judgments

A party can challenge the maintainability of an appeal, even if the delay in filing cross-objections is condoned due to bonafide reasons.

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India
238 CTR 353 · Supreme Court
10
citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that the provisions for obtaining approval from the Chief Commissioner of Customs and Excise (CoD) had outlived their utility, leading to the recall of previous orders that relied on such approvals.

CIT v. State Bank of Hyderabad
382 ITR 499 · 2016 · Reported
10
citing judgments

A Tribunal order recalling an earlier order that was dismissed for want of condonation of delay approval is interlocutory and does not adjudicate on merits.

Judgments citing miscellaneous application

M/S Sachin Udyog Nagar Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(2), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 438/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.438/Srt/2022 (Hearing In Physical Court) M/S Sachin Udyog Nagar Assistant Commissioner Of Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Income Tax-Circle-1(2), Vs 2Nd Floor, Vivekanand Aaaykar Bhavan, Majura Chambers, Beside Rajeshree Gate, Surat-3950001 Hall, Sagarampura, Surat- 395002 Pan No. Aacts 7414 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 254(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

vide order dated 07.02.2023 alongwith ITA No. 439/Srt/2022. However, the order dated 07.02.2023 was partially recalled vide order dated 27.08.2023, qua present appeal in Miscellaneous Application (MA) No.47/SRT/2023 by Revenue. Thus, this appeal was fixed for hearing afresh. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. In view

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2, Thane

ITA 765/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application praying before the Tribunal to recall the order. The Tribunal vide order dated 31/07/2023 (M.A. No.211 & 212/Mum/2023, order dated 31/07/2023), recalled the order

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Central Cir -2 Thanee, Thane

ITA 764/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application praying before the Tribunal to recall the order. The Tribunal vide order dated 31/07/2023 (M.A. No.211 & 212/Mum/2023, order dated 31/07/2023), recalled the order

Diwyesh Mahendra Dave, Mumbai vs. DCIT 26(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 204/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application. The Tribunal vide order dated 05/07/2023 has recalled the order passed on 25/05/2022 and directed the registry to fix the appeal for fresh hearing. Accordingly

Dy.Comm of Income Tax-17(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Maharashtra State Security Corporation, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1837/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application, praying before the Tribunal to recall the order dated 10/08/2022. The Tribunal vide order dated 19/07/2023 (M.A. No.217/Mum/2023), recalled the order restoring the appeal

Dy.Comm of Income Tax-17(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Maharashtra State Security Corporation, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1836/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application, praying before the Tribunal to recall the order dated 10/08/2022. The Tribunal vide order dated 19/07/2023 (M.A. No.217/Mum/2023), recalled the order restoring the appeal

Tex-Styles International Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1915/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 passed on 12/10/2022, the revenue moved a miscellaneous application. The Tribunal vide order dated 09/08/2023 (MA No.172/Mum/2023) has recalled the order passed on 07/07/2022 and directed the registry to fix the appeal for fresh

Shri Santosh Bhalchandra Powle, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-22(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2267/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Santosh Vs. Acit-22(3), Bhalchandra Powle, Aayakar Bhavan, 8Th National House, 3Rd M.K.Road, Floor,27 Raghunath Mumbai-400020. Dadaji Street,Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan/Gir No. : Aajpp1107A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms.Aishwarya Vanikar.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Virbhandra Mahjan.Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(2)

respect of vehicle expenses , the disallowance was restricted @ 10% as against @20% made by the Assessing Officer. Further the assessee has filed the Miscellaneous application in the ITAT order dealt at Para 4 of the A.O order as under: “4. Further, the filed Miscellaneous Application and sought rectification/recall of ITAT ... 7498/Mum/2016 dated 06.09.2017. Pursuant to it, the Hon'ble ITAT passed the order u/s 254(2) of the Act vide order No Miscellaneous Application No. 234/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA No. 7498/Mum/2016 dated 11.12.2018. Shri Santosh Bhalchandra Powle., Mumbai. The Tribunal has allowed/disallowed/set aside the following issues: 01 Telephone & Mobile

Ups Express Private Limited (Formerly Known As Ups Jetair Express Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT 3(1) (1) Addl/Jt/Dy/CIT/ITO/NFAC-Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2439/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Ups Express Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Ups Jetair Dcit-3(1)(1) Express Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 6-A, Shyam Off Jvlr, Majas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Village, Jogeshwari(E) Mumbai-400060 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacu4322N Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue By : Shri Dhiraj Kumar Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Dhiraj Kumar
Section 131

issue was restored back to the file of the Ld. TPO/AO for fresh bench marking. For A.Y. 2014-15 the Miscellaneous Application was filed wherein by order dated 04.02.2021 Para No. 14 of the order restoring matter back to the file of Ld. TPO/AO was deleted. He further referred

R.S. Pabbla Constructions Pvt.Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 88/VIZ/2017[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 40

heard and disposed off vide exparte order dated 23/02/2022 as there was no representation on behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee filed 2 Miscellaneous Applications with a prayer to recall the order to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural

R.S. Pabbla Constructions Pvt.Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 87/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 40

heard and disposed off vide exparte order dated 23/02/2022 as there was no representation on behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee filed 2 Miscellaneous Applications with a prayer to recall the order to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural

Lg Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in view of the above mentioned terms

ITA 755/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Astha Chandralg Electronics India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 51, Udyog Vihar, Circle-2, Noida Surajpur Kasna Road, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacl1745Q Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv, Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv Shri Ramit Katyal, Ar Mr. Aditya Vohra, Adv Revenue By: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13/10/2023

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 144

outset, we find that this appeal of the assessee has already been disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 16.09.2022. However, a miscellaneous application was preferred by the assessee stating that this Tribunal while adjudicating ground No. 12 with regard to taxability of sales tax subsidy received under Maharashtra ... sales tax subsidy under Uttar Pradesh Scheme and no finding was given for Maharashtra Incentives Scheme. Accordingly, this Tribunal had disposed of the miscellaneous application of the assessee accepting the plea vide MA No. 285/Del/2022 dated 31.03.2023 specifically recalling the earlier order only for the limited purpose of adjudicating ground

M/S. Linklaters, Mumbai vs. The DDIT (It) 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3280/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelinklaters V. Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) V. Linklaters Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 44C

ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and decided the issue in favour of the assessee and against the department. He brought to notice Miscellaneous application order dated 20.02.2015 in assessee’s own case in M.A. No. 392/Mum/2014 copy of the order is placed on record. 18. On the other hand ... Special Bench in the above cited case. Accordingly, we reject the ground urged by the revenue on this issue” 4. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is allowed.” 20. Further, the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the A.Y.2003-04 in ITA.No. 1532/Mum/2007 held

DDIT (It)-4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Linklaters, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3039/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelinklaters V. Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (International Taxation) – 4(1) V. Linklaters Scindia House, N.M. Road C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Indiabulls Finance Centre Tower 3 28Th Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road (West) Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aabfl2160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 44C

ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and decided the issue in favour of the assessee and against the department. He brought to notice Miscellaneous application order dated 20.02.2015 in assessee’s own case in M.A. No. 392/Mum/2014 copy of the order is placed on record. 18. On the other hand ... Special Bench in the above cited case. Accordingly, we reject the ground urged by the revenue on this issue” 4. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is allowed.” 20. Further, the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the A.Y.2003-04 in ITA.No. 1532/Mum/2007 held

M/S. Sofitra Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 1749/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

assessee deserve to be dismissed. 8. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.” 6. However the assessee preferred Miscellaneous application no. 667 and 661/Del/2017 which were allowed on 03.12.2021 with following order :- “The order in this case has been passed on 10.01.2017. During the hearings ... initial order dated 10.01.2017 stand recalled therefore, the appeal has to be heard on merits however, we are of the view that the Miscellaneous Application was filed for limited purpose pointing out non-consideration of two judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and accordingly the order was recalled

M/S. Sofitra Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 1748/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

assessee deserve to be dismissed. 8. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.” 6. However the assessee preferred Miscellaneous application no. 667 and 661/Del/2017 which were allowed on 03.12.2021 with following order :- “The order in this case has been passed on 10.01.2017. During the hearings ... initial order dated 10.01.2017 stand recalled therefore, the appeal has to be heard on merits however, we are of the view that the Miscellaneous Application was filed for limited purpose pointing out non-consideration of two judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and accordingly the order was recalled

M/S C.K. Construction & Co., Samastipur vs. ACIT, Darbhanga

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 147/PAT/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

earlier listed before the Tribunal and it was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 12.10.2017. Thereafter the assessee has filed a Miscellaneous Application bearing M.A. No. 6/PAT/2018 and pointed out the reasons for its absence on the date of hearing of the appeal. The Tribunal was satisfied that

Savla Buildwell LLP, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 2065/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2065/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Savla Buildwell Llp बिधम/ Ito, Ward-33(3)(3) 6.52, Mahavir Nagar, Near Kautilya Bhawan, Vs. Ganesh Kripa Society, Mumbai-400020. Ekta Nagar, Opp Bharat Petrol Pump, Link Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai- 400067. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Absfs9884P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Smt. Himani Jain Revenue By: Shri Prakash Kishinchandani (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Llp Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13.06.2020 For Ay 2012-13. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That This Tribunal Had Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee In The First Round As Not Maintainable, Since The Assessee Omitted To File The Grounds Of Appeal As Well As It Was An Ex-Parte Order Qua Assessee Dated 23.12.2022. However, The Assessee Preferred Miscellaneous Application (Ma) Against The Order Passed By The Tribunal Dated 23.12.2022 & The Tribunal Was Pleased To Recall The Order, Since The Tribunal Order Was An Ex-Parte Order.

For Appellant: Smt. Himani JainFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Kishinchandani (Sr
Section 250Section 250(6)

omitted to file the grounds of appeal as well as it was an ex-parte order qua assessee dated 23.12.2022. However, the assessee preferred Miscellaneous Application (MA) against the order passed by the Tribunal dated 23.12.2022 and the Tribunal was pleased to recall the order, since the Tribunal order

ACIT(OSD), Ward-22(1), New Delhi vs. S.S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3246/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit(Osd), Vs. S. S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd, Ward-22(1), A-6/3, Jhilmil Industrial Area, New Delhi Shahdara, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1928C Co No. 54/Del/2023 (In Ita No. 3246/Del/2019) (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Acit(Osd), Vs. S. S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd, Ward-22(1), A-6/3, Jhilmil Industrial Area, New Delhi Shahdara, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1928C Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Kumar Bindal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/10/2023 O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, A. M.: 1. The Appeal In Ita No. 3246/Del/2019 Filed By The Revenue & Co No. 54/Del/2023 387/Del/2021 Filed By The Assessee For Ay 2008-09, Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Cit(A)‟, In Short] In Appeal No. 10208/16-17 Dated 08.02.2019 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Dated 09.03.2016 By The Assessing Officer, Ito, Ward-22(1), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Ao‟).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

involved in the appeal was less than the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT Circular for preferring appeal before this tribunal. Later revenue preferred miscellaneous application before this tribunal on the ground that the case falls under the exception to the aforesaid CBDT Circular. At this juncture, the assessee ... original Form 36 filed by the revenue, grounds of appeal of the revenue, Tribunal Order disposing of the appeal of the revenue and miscellaneous application filed by the revenue. Since the main appeal of the revenue was already disposed by this tribunal, the assessee could not file any cross objection

Inocme Tax Officer Ward -2, Bhandara vs. The Bhandrara Urban Co-Operative Bank Limited, Bhandara

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 159/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.159/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, The Bhandara Urban Co- Ward-2, Bhandara. Vs Operative Bank Limited, Gandhi Chowk, Bhandara, Maharashtra – 441904. Pan : Aaaft 7398 G Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee

Section 143(3)Section 36

Revenue on account of low tax effect. However, if Revenue disagrees with the calculation submitted by the ld.AR, the Revenue is free to file Miscellaneous Application if deemed appropriate. 4. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th