← All Phrases

“Section 143(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(3)45,044 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(3) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(3)

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Judgments citing Section 143(3)

Raj Kumar Sharma, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3082/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 31/03/2018 sustained the disallowance to the extent of Rs.24,96,935/- made by the AO on account of expenditure claimed by the assessee u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Raj Kumar Sharma vs. ACIT

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Lalita Sanjivreddy Bodkurwar, Nagpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagpur

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 90/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Nagpur vs. M/S Star Orchem International Pvt Ltd, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 89/NAG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Umang AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Nagpur vs. M/S Indoworth India Limited, Nagpur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 108/NAG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

ACIT, Wardha Circle, Wardha vs. M/S Eureka Medicare Pvt Ltd, Yavatmal

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 102/NAG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 8G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

M/S B.Himmatlal Agrawal, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer 4(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 194/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JakhotiaFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Shri Padmakar Rambhau Somwanshi, Amravati vs. A, C.I.T Cent Cir., Akola

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 552/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Tambi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

Shri Padmakar Rambhau Somwanshi, Amravati vs. A, C.I.T Cent Cir., Akola

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 551/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Tambi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE

The Athani Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Athani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Belagavi

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 90/PAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Chetan ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Dr, Prashant V Athani, Nipani vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 45/PAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Vaidhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Shivshankar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 69B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1), Raipur vs. M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 73/RPR/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri, Sakshi Gopal Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

assessment within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, even when the assessment has been made cinder Section 143(3) of the Act, is not 11 DCIT (Central Circle-1), Raipur Vs. M/s. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. curtailed by the proviso it Section ... Therefore, even where an assessee has disclosed all material facts truly and fully for assessment and assessment is completed under Section 143(3) of the Act, the reopening is permissible within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The only condition precedent for exercising

Kirtikumar Nagindas Shah, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

In the result, ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.535/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Kiritkumar Nagindas Shah, Vs. The Ito, A-1103, Regent Residency, Near Ward – 2(3)(6), Saurabh Society, Pal, Surat Surat – 395009, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anjps9031P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT (SMC) BENCH BEFORE SHRI DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं

The Sagbara Dediapada Vibhag Aadivasi Mahila Vikash Bachat and Dhiran Sahkari Mandali Limited, 2017-18 vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(5), Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 472/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.472/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) The Sagbara Dediapada Vibhag Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Aadivasi Mahila Vikash Vharuch, Income Tax Office, Vs. Bachat & Dhiran Sahkari Harikunj, Station Road, Mandali Ltd. Pandorimata Bharuch-356 069 Society Nr. Court, Chikda Road, Taluka: Dediapda, Dist. Narmada-393040 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadat 6688 F (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing 06/09/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 12/10/2023

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

Delhi (in short “NFAC/ld. CIT(A)”], dated 30.06.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 27.11.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee

M/S. Pragati Milk Product Pvt. Ltd., Cuttack vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for respective assessment years under consideration are allowed

ITA 145/CTK/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.143 To 145/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 To 2014-2015) M/S Pragati Milk Products(P) Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Plot No.71/A/1, New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack-754021 Pan No. :Aaecp 6353 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.10.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0487/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was Search In The Premises Of The Assessee. As A Consequence Of Search, Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.153A Of The Act. In The Assessment U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Had Been Granted The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib(11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Was The Subject Matter Of Rectification Application On Multiple Occasions & In The Third Round Of Rectification Application The Ao Has Withdrawn The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib (11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The 2

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज

M/S. Pragati Milk Product Pvt. Ltd., Cuttack vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for respective assessment years under consideration are allowed

ITA 144/CTK/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.143 To 145/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 To 2014-2015) M/S Pragati Milk Products(P) Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Plot No.71/A/1, New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack-754021 Pan No. :Aaecp 6353 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.10.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0487/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was Search In The Premises Of The Assessee. As A Consequence Of Search, Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.153A Of The Act. In The Assessment U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Had Been Granted The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib(11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Was The Subject Matter Of Rectification Application On Multiple Occasions & In The Third Round Of Rectification Application The Ao Has Withdrawn The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib (11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The 2

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज

M/S. Pragati Milk Product Pvt. Ltd., Cuttack vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for respective assessment years under consideration are allowed

ITA 143/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.143 To 145/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 To 2014-2015) M/S Pragati Milk Products(P) Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Plot No.71/A/1, New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack-754021 Pan No. :Aaecp 6353 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.10.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0487/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was Search In The Premises Of The Assessee. As A Consequence Of Search, Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.153A Of The Act. In The Assessment U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Had Been Granted The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib(11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Was The Subject Matter Of Rectification Application On Multiple Occasions & In The Third Round Of Rectification Application The Ao Has Withdrawn The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib (11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The 2

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज

Sanjay Gurdasmal Chawla, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 2387/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalsanjaygurdasmalchawla, Vs. Acit – 21 1301, Lake Superior 2Nd Floor, Piramal Phase No. 5, As Marg Chamber, Lalbaug, Chandivali Farm Road, Lower Parel, Powai- Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400076. Pan/Gir No. : Abopc7669L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Manish Trivedi.CA.ARFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishore Dhule.CIT DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT

Genxt Mobile LLP, Mumbai vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 31(1)

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2106/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hemant ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) vide order dated Genxt Mobile LLP ITA no.2106/Mum./2023 29/12/2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act by drawing an analogy from the provisions of section 40(b)(iv) of the Act, which restricts allowance of payment

Polygel Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1971/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepolygel Industries Pvt. Ltd., V. Pcit – Mumbai – 2 321, The Great Eastern Galleria Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Plot No. 20, Sector – 4 Mumbai - 400020 Nerul (West), Navi Mumbai Thane - 400706 Pan: Aaack4105F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi Department Represented By : Shri K.C. Selvamani

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Dheerajsingh Omprakashsingh Mohnia, Mumbai vs. ITO, Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3280/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Dheerajsingh Income Tax Officer, Omprakashsingh Mohnia, Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), Room No.1627, 16Th Floor, C/O. Vaish Associates, 106, Peninsula Centre, Vs. Air India Building, Dr. S.S. Rao Road, Nariman Point, Parel, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 012 Pan: Amvpm6622M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Soni, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 69A

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)') erred on facts and in law in confirming the assessment completed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act') at an income of Rs. 93,11,280 as against the income of Rs. 3 ... income of the assessee is taxed under section 115BBE of the Act @ 60% and assessed the total income at Rs.93,11,280/- under section 143(3) of the Act. 6. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition