← 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)

Sivira Organiks P Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-13(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 83/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.83/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Sivira Organiks Pvt. Ltd. बिधम Income Tax Officer, 13 113, Matermind-I, Aarey (2) (2) Vs. Milk Colony, Goregaon(E) Room No.147, 1St Floor, Mumbai-400 063 Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जी. आइ. आर. सं/.Pan/Gir No: .Aamcs2596J अपीलार्थी / Appellant .. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Smt Lavanya RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Anil K.Das
Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT

Shreeyan Power and Steel Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 394/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shreeyam Power & Steel Dy. Cit, Circle-3(3)(1), Industries Ltd., Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, 621, Tulsiani Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Chambers, Nariman Point, Karve Road, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacm 7130 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Harsh Bafna, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Anil Sant, Dr : Date Of Hearing 20/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Harsh Bafna, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Anil Sant, DR
Section 147Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

Shreeji Trans Logistics Ltd., Thane vs. CIT (A), CPC, Banglore

In the result, th same. In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are e grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed

ITA 388/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Ita No. 388 To 390/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2019-2020 Shreeji Translogistics Ltd., Cit(Appeals), Plot No. 107, Shreeji Krupa, National Faceless Appeal Vs. Sector 19-C, Phase-Ii Vashi, Centre, Thane-400705 Delhi. Pan No. Aaecs 3602 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. Anil Sant, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Anil Sant, DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)

judgement was rendered in the context where Supreme Court judgement was rendered in the context where assessment was framed assessment was framed under section 143(3) of the Act and under section 143(3) of the Act and not under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act. In other

Shri Sanjaykumar Babulal Jain, Mum vs. DCIT, CC-6(3), Mum

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Sanjaykumar Babulal Jain, Dcit, Cc-6(3), 28, Kewal Industries Estate, Sb 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. Marg, Lower Parel (W), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aefpj 7802 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Karan Jain, Ar Revenue By : Mr. A.S. Sant, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Karan Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. A.S. Sant, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

Spick-N-Span Services, Mum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-41(3)(1) Erstwhile Ward-27(3)(3), Mum

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 14/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.14/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.15/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Spick-N-Span Services बिधम/ Income Tax Officer Ward- 41(3)(1) (Erstwhile 409, 4Th Floor, Sej Plaza, Vs. Marve Road Malad (W) Ward- 27(3)(3) Mumbai- 400064 Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai- 400051 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaofs2733G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar Das. Sr. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/03/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 16.11.2022 For Ay 2011-12 & Ay 2018-19. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 48,19,696/- For The Ay 2011-12 U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Herein After ‘The Act’) & Rs. 1,48,61,729/- (Ay 2018- 19) U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Both On Account Of Disallowance Of Employees Contribution Of Provident Fund & Esic U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act. Since, The Issue

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Das. Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT

DCIT (TDS)(OSD)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 126/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor
Section 165ASection 204Section 250

Principle of Consistency in the assessment made bv the Department We find that the ld. AO while passing the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act for the Asst Year 2016-17 dated 8.12.2018 had duly accepted the fact that UISPL is an entity engaged in the business

DCIT-27 (2), Mumbai vs. Shri Mitesh Balwantrai Kamdar, Mumbai

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

ITA 3120/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dcit-27(2) Shri Mitesh Balwantrai Kamdar Room No. 419, 9Th Floor, 801, Kalindi Neelkanthvalley, Vs. Rajawadi, 7Th Road, Ghatkoper (E), Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 Pan/Gir No. Aadpk 0912 E (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhadersh Doshi : Smt. Mahita Nair Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 : 26.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Bhadersh Doshi
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54(2)

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

ACIT, Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S D Ravilal Resource Management Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2995/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Acit, Circle-14(1)(2) M/S. D Ravilal Resource Room No. 455, 4Th Floor, Management Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 18, Sorrel, Ghatkopar, Kirol, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Panthnagar, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400 075 Pan/Gir No. Aaccg 2374 E (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.04.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3, Thane vs. M/S. Ameya Builders & Property Developers, Mumbai

ITA 2219/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Madhavi
Section 250Section 801B(10)

search and statement of the partners recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act. During the assessment proceedings under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer noted that as against the aforesaid amount of INR 40,46,18,086/-, the Assessee had offered

M/S. Ameya Builders & Property Developers, Mumbai vs. Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1936/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Madhavi
Section 250Section 801B(10)

search and statement of the partners recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act. During the assessment proceedings under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer noted that as against the aforesaid amount of INR 40,46,18,086/-, the Assessee had offered

DCIT - CC- 6(4), Mumbai vs. Fornax Real Estate Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the petition under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, as filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 1427/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 44A

Rs.35,66,74,501. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and vide assessment order dated 20/02/2015 passed under section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) assessed the income of the assessee at loss of Rs. 35,66,74,501. Subsequently, vide notice dated ... various details were sought from the assessee, which was duly responded to by the assessee. The AO vide order dated 30/12/2019, passed under section 143(3) r/w section 147 of the Act held that the assessee has failed to substantiate that the income shown by the assessee in its profit

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Financial Consultants Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3041/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3041/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-3(3)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Watermark Financial Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Consultants Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 1009 & 1010, Maker Road, Mumbai-400020. Chamber-V, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw3474H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh Gupta Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-08, Mumbai Dated 28.02.2017 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. The First Ground Of Appeal Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.79,333/- Made U/S 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 3. Brief Facts As Noted By The Ao Are That The Assessee Has Earned Dividend Income Of Rs.384/- & Has Not Made Any Disallowance For Earning The Exempt Income. Therefore, He Applied Rule 8D(2)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”) & Computed Disallowance At Rs.79,333/- & Disallowed It. Aggrieved, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A), Who Was Pleased To Delete It. Aggrieved, The Revenue Is Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM

ITO 9(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Fusion Jewellery Manufacturing Company P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as ‘withdrawn/not pressed’

ITA 5084/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhattFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)

whereby the CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 10/04/2014, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). When the appeal was taken up for hearing ... find that the Assessing 3. Officer has assessed income of the Assessee at INR 16,54,200/- vide order dated 10/04/2014 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Act as against returned income of INR.9,75,015/-. According to the Circular

United Bank of India (Formely) Now Punjab National Bank, Delhi vs. ACIT Ltu-1 Kolkata (Under Transfer to Circle 19(1), Delhi

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

ITA 387/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 154Section 234DSection 244ASection 250

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

JCIT Circle-22(1), New Delhi vs. Saidham Overseas Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon

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

ITA 4063/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Priyansh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)

VIII, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 22.02.2019 arising from the assessment order dated 22.02.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2013-14. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under

Delhi State Taxi Operators Co-Operative Thrift Credit & Services Society Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Range - 60, New Delhi

ITA 3108/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 275

Mumbai). 6.2 It was contended by the assessee that the impugned penalty order is barred by limitation as assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was made on 30.03.2016. The first penalty notice was issued on 04.05.2016 and the penalty order was passed on 24.04.2017 which is barred ... notice issued for imposing penalty. 6.3 According to the assesee, the assessment in its case in several preceding years have been completed under section 143(3) under complete scrutiny and impugned penalties have never been imposed on the assessee which confirmed the bonafide belief of the assessee that provisions

Delhi State Taxi Operators Co-Operative Thrift Credit & Services Society Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Range - 60, New Delhi

ITA 3107/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 275

Mumbai). 6.2 It was contended by the assessee that the impugned penalty order is barred by limitation as assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was made on 30.03.2016. The first penalty notice was issued on 04.05.2016 and the penalty order was passed on 24.04.2017 which is barred ... notice issued for imposing penalty. 6.3 According to the assesee, the assessment in its case in several preceding years have been completed under section 143(3) under complete scrutiny and impugned penalties have never been imposed on the assessee which confirmed the bonafide belief of the assessee that provisions

Rajhans Infratech Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-21(2), New Delhi

Accordingly, decided in favour of the assessee. Consequently, appeal of assessee is allowed and impugned addition is deleted

ITA 2153/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2153/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 M/S. Rajhans Infratech Pvt. Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, M-32, 2Nd Floor, Gk-1, Circle-21(2) New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacd0055F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH

R.K.Machine Tools Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-20(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6616/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 143(3)

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

Indian Herbs Specialities Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 12(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed partly

ITA 505/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaa No. 505/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. Indian Herbs Vs. Dcit, Specialities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-12(1), D-21, Shop No. 2, New Delhi Acharya Niketan, Mayur Vihar Phase-1, Delhi 110092 Pan : Aadci0033P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH