← 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)

Hardikkumar Maganbhai Thumar, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the assessee appeal is allowed for statical purpose

ITA 625/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 625/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Hybrid Hearing) Hardikkumar Maganbhai Thumar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward Jetalsar, Jetalsar Post, Jetpur Rajkot- 1(1)(1),/Rkt. 360360.Gujarat It Office, New Aaykar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot. Gujarat 360360 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Axupt8837F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kishor Gheewala, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23 / 12 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05 / 01 /2026

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Gheewala, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 194HSection 250Section 40

ITA No. 625/Rjt/2025 Hardikbhai Maganbhai Thumar IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI

Nayna Mukeshkumar Kotecha, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statical purpose

ITA 187/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Shingala, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

this case, the draft order was passed on 19.03.2023 where in following was mentioned. "The assessment is proposed to be completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1). Tax and interest chargeable will be calculated on income on finalization of Draft Assessment Order and demand will be raised accordingly. Penalty ... dated 28.12.2023 bearing DIN no.ITBA/DRP/F/144C(5)/2023-24/1059137922(1) rejecting the objection. Accordingly, the assessment is finalized u/s. 144C(3) of the Act. 10. Assessed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 r.w.s 144C(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Demand notice is enclosed herewith. The computation of tax is as per computer

Sanjivini Sahu, Ranchi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ranchi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 36/RAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaysanjivini Sahu, I.T.O., W/O-Mr. Rajesh Sahu, Janki Kunj, Ward-3(3), Vs. Janki Cokes, Mahabir Chowk, Upper Ranchi. Bazar, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aiops 4497 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)

parte. It was then submitted by the ld. AR that this is a case where an earlier assessment order under Section 143(3) has been passed. Sanjivini Sahu Vs ITO 4. It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that no return had been filed originally and this

Krishna Construction, Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle-1 Ranchi, Ranchi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 21/RAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaykrishna Construction, D.C.I.T., Plot No. 59, New A G Cooperative Circle-1, Vs. Colony, Near Dav Kapildev, Ranchi. Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacb 7934 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)

passed the order on Krishna Construction Vs DCIT 23/10/2024. It was also the submission that the assessment order itself has been passed under Section 143(3) and therefore, it should be assumed that non-compliance to earlier notices was already pardoned by the Assessing Officer. 4. In reply ... lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the quantum assessment order has been passed under Section 143(3) after the alleged non-compliance by the assessee, it is assumed that the assessee has subsequently cooperated in the assessment proceedings and therefore, the Assessing

Ally Enterprises, Jamshedpur vs. Deputy 0R Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

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

ITA 364/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

other details were produced by the assessee 3 Ally Enterprises Vs D/ACIT for verification. The Assessing Officer, therefore, after completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 20/12/2019 and made additions of ₹ 17,33,503/- on account of undisclosed sources of income

Sanoj Kumar Singh, Hajipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Vaishali

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 366/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH”,PATNA SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M/S Aabdeen Travel Services, Kanpur vs. ITO-1(3)(1), Kanpur

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

ITA 400/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 68

year under consideration on 01/11/2017 declaring total income of Rs.1,36,861/-. The Assessing Officer processed the return and passed assessment order under section 143(3) of the I. T. Act on 23/12/2019 and I.T.A. No.400/Lkw/2023 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.79

M/S. Narain Properties Limited, Kanpur vs. ACIT-VI, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 354/LKW/2010[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Jan 2026AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 45

Income Tax (Appeals) II, Kanpur [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. In this case, assessment order dated 27.03.2002 was passed by the AO under Section 143(3) of the Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.21,22,810/- as against returned income of Rs.9

Vineetsingh Gulabsingh Rore, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 868/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Maloo, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 253(5)Section 263Section 69

India hereby solemnly swear and affirm the following statements before the Notary Public: Initial Compliance: I was subjected to original assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The proceedings were finalized vide order dated 22nd December ... notices and participated in the proceedings as required. Subsequent Order: Subsequent to the directions of the PCIT under Section 263, an order under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 and Section 1448 of the Act was passed on 23rd September 2023, making an addition

Maharshi Karve Stree Shikshan Sansthas Employees Coop Society Ltd, Pune vs. ITO Easssessment Center, Delhi

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

ITA 668/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anand KhandewaleFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual)
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Sandip Ganpat Lokhande, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(2), Pune

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

ITA 2628/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2628/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sandip Ganpat Lokhande, Vs. Ito, Ward-13(2), Pune. A/P Annapur, Tal- Shirur, Shirur S.O., Pune- 412210. Pan : Akepl2437L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Manish Sinha Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.09.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Dismissing Appeal By Not Condoning The Delay Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming Levy Of Penalty U/S 270A At Rs 3,59,726/- Towards Alleged Misreporting Of Income. 3. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Substitute Any Ground Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha
Section 143(3)Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Kalpesh Deepak Fuldale, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(2), Pune

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

ITA 2627/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2627/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kalpesh Deepak Fuldale, Vs. Ito, Ward-13(2), Pune. A/P Pargaon (S.M.), Tal- Daund, Dist- Pune- 412203. Pan : Arhpp1574G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Manish Sinha Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.09.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Facts & On Law In Confirming Levy Of Penalty U/S 270A Under Reporting / Misreporting Of Income.

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha
Section 143(3)Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Santosh Arun Kaspate, Pune vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2199/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2198 & 2199/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Santosh Arun Kaspate, Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Panchwati Niwas Kaspate Vasti, Wakad, Pune- 411027. Pan : Acypk3347C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 25.07.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2198/Pun/2025 For Adjudication As The Lead Case.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade
Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Santosh Arun Kaspate, Pune vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2198/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2198 & 2199/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Santosh Arun Kaspate, Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Panchwati Niwas Kaspate Vasti, Wakad, Pune- 411027. Pan : Acypk3347C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 25.07.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2198/Pun/2025 For Adjudication As The Lead Case.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade
Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Processia Plm Private Limited, Pune vs. National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi

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

ITA 2007/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2007/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Processia Plm Private Vs. Income Tax Department, Limited, National E-Assessment First Floor, Office No.102, Centre, Delhi. Amar Apex Building, Amar Apex Condominium, Baner, Pune-411045. Pan : Aaact6811H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Harshit Bari Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “Ground No. 1: On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 ('The Act') Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ['Ld. Cit(A)'] On 12 June 2025 Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 244ASection 250

made by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ('Learned AO') in the assessment order dated 17 April 2021 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. Ground No. 3: On the facts and circumstances of the case

Mr Bharat Datta Nakhava, Raigad vs. ITO WD-3, Panvel

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

ITA 1982/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha (Virtual)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Kadeer Shaikh Amir Shaikh, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1981/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1981/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Kadeer Shaikh Amir Shaikh, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), 178, Tilak Nagar, Sillod, Aurangabad. Aurangabad- 431112. Pan : Cxgps1949P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ramesh N. Thete (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Manish Sinha (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Chennai [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Duly Supported By An Affidavit That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh N. Thete (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha (Virtual)
Section 143(3)Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Mrs. Uma Aarun Patil, Pune vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Income Tax Department

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

ITA 1974/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk
Section 24

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Shankar Ananda Padalkar, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Solapur

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

ITA 1900/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1900/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shankar Ananda Padalkar, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), 416, Gr. Floor, Gala No.3, Solapur. Kuldaivat Gold Market, Solapur- 413002. Pan : Anwpp7661H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. G. Bhutada & Shri V. D. Bhutada Revenue By : Shri Ganesh B. Budruk Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Ground No. 1 The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of ₹50,20,000/- Under Section 69A Read With Section 115Bbe Of The Act, Without Properly Appreciating

For Appellant: Shri S. G. Bhutada &For Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Shri Mahadev Tukaram Kanchan, Pune vs. ITO Ward-14(3), Pune

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

ITA 1674/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1674/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 | Shri Mahadev Tukaram Kanchan, 45, Mahadev Niwas, Parivartan Society, Ashram Road, Urali Kanchan, Pune-412202. PAN : AWXPK5330Q | Vs. | ITO, Ward-14(3), Pune. | | Appellant | | Respondent | Assessee by : Shri B. C. Malakar, Shri Yuvraj V. Bhandare Revenue by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 05.01.

For Appellant: Shri B. C. Malakar &For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE