← 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)

Raghav Bahl, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA

ITA 739/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 120Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153D

Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and facts of the case while upholding the assessment framed under section 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in absence of any incriminating material being found and seized during the course of Search proceedings. As such ... Kumar Modi, it could have been made only under Section 153C of the Act, but not under Section of 153A r.w. Section 143(3) of the Act. Thus submitted the A.O. committed error in faming the Assessments under Section 153A of the Act. The Ld. AR relied on the Orders

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Indian Hydro Electric Power Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3907/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

material seized from the search conducted on Jain group of companies. The assessment order was also passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153C of the Act making additions under Section 68 of the Act. 20. However, it is an undisputed fact that the statement recorded under Section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Indian Hydro Electric Power Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3906/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

material seized from the search conducted on Jain group of companies. The assessment order was also passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153C of the Act making additions under Section 68 of the Act. 20. However, it is an undisputed fact that the statement recorded under Section

ACIT, C R Building vs. Gurpreet Kochar, K.G.Marg

In the result, Revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 3465/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

Delhi-27/10727/2018-19, arising out of the order dated 29.12.2018 passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi, under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read

Hari Kishan Rathi, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

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

ITA 2242/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhari Kishan Rathi, Vs. Acit, Central Circle 14, A – 184, Shivalik, Malviya Vihar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 007. (Pan : Aakpr2574C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mayank Patawari, Advocate Shri Akash Ojha, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 07.11.2025 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman, Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-31, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 11.07.2023 For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ay 2015-16 :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By Ld. Cit (A) Is Bad Both In Eyes Of Law & On Facts. 2. That The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Holding That Approval U/S 153D Of The Act Granted By Addl. Cit On 30.12.2019 Was Not Accorded In A Mechanical Manner. 2.1 That The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Ignoring The Fact That Such Approval Had Been Taken From Addl.Cit On 30.12.2019 When The 2 Compliance For Show Cause Notice Issued On 30.12.2019 Was Fixed For 31.12.2019. 3. That The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Sustaining The Addition To The Extent Of Rs.2,27,717/- On Account Of Renovation Expenses.” 3. Before Deciding The Legal Issue In Dispute, We May Gainfully Reproduce The Approval U/S. 153D Of The Income Tax Act (For Short ‘The Act’), Which Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 153D

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

Prem Lata Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle, Karnal

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

ITA 1422/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Prem Lata Gupta, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of C-5/2A, Opp Cc Colony, Income Tax, Rana Pratap Bagh, North Delhi Central Circle Pin: 1100 07 Karnal. Pan: Aadpl3023F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv., Shri Pawan GargFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250(6)

assessment order dated 31.12.2019 of the Learned Assessing Officer/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Karnal (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO") under Sections 143(3) of the Act, 1961 for assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of case are that search and seizure operation under Section

Shri Likha Saaya, Nirjili vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- North Lakhimpur., Lakhimpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 50/GTY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumarand Manmohan Dasita Nos.49 & 50/Gty/2021 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Likha Saaya S/O. Shri Likha Vs. Ito, Ward-North, Lakhimpur Heli, P-Sector, P.O. Nirjuli, Borah Complex, D.K.Road, North District Papumpare, Arunachal Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, Assam- Pradesh-791109 787001 Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Sarala Agarwal. Ar Revenue By : Shri Kausik Ray, Jcit

For Appellant: Sarala Agarwal. ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATI‘ D’ BENCH, GUWAHATI BEFORE S/SHRIAND RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND MANMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Shri Likha Saaya, Nirjili vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- North Lakhimpur., Lakhimpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 49/GTY/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumarand Manmohan Dasita Nos.49 & 50/Gty/2021 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Likha Saaya S/O. Shri Likha Vs. Ito, Ward-North, Lakhimpur Heli, P-Sector, P.O. Nirjuli, Borah Complex, D.K.Road, North District Papumpare, Arunachal Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, Assam- Pradesh-791109 787001 Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Sarala Agarwal. Ar Revenue By : Shri Kausik Ray, Jcit

For Appellant: Sarala Agarwal. ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATI‘ D’ BENCH, GUWAHATI BEFORE S/SHRIAND RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND MANMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Babubhai Kanjibhai Sakaria, Jetpur vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 156/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 156/Rjt/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Babubhai Kanjibhai Sakariya Vs. Ito, Wd 1(2)(1), Rajkot Plot No. 82 Satyam Park, Amarnagar Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Jetpur,(Rajkot-Gujarat) -360370 Road, Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agnps7407C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 250Section 28

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोट"ायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Pattathanam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd No 1145, Kollam vs. ITO, Ward 2, Kollam

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 718/COCH/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sabu C.S., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Pattathanam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd No 1145, Kollam vs. ITO, Ward 2, Kollam

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 717/COCH/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sabu C.S., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

The Kattoor Service Cooperative Bank Limited, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Thrissur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 714/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2022-23 Kattoor Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kattoor P.O., Thrissur 680702 [Pan: Aacat3937A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Amaljith P.J., Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Cit(A)” In Short] Dated 25.08.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1961. It Is Classified As A Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Accepting Deposits From Members & Providing Credit Facilities To Members. The Return Of 2 Kattoor Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Income For Ay 2022-23 Was Filed On 05.11.2022 Disclosing Nil Income After Claiming Deduction U/S. 80P Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passes U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act At A Total Income Of Rs.5,21,52,939/-. While Doing So, The Ao Denied Deduction U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) & U/S. 80P(2)(D) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 63Section 64Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Shanthi Michealanthonyraj Jancy, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward 1 and Tps, Palakkad

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

ITA 701/COCH/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2023-24 Shanthi Michealanthonyraj Jancy .......... Appellant Shanthi Nivas, Kozhipathy, Palakkad 678557 [Pan: Cgfpj6644G] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1& Tps, Palakkad ....... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Paddmanathan, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, [Hereinafter The “Ld.Cit(A)”]Dated 21.08.2025For The Assessment Year 2023-24 (Hereinafter The "Ay").

For Appellant: Shri Paddmanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Pooram Fin Serv Pvt. Ltd, Thrissur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), Baroda

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

ITA 604/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pooram Fin Serv Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 1St Floor, Pathayapura Building, Round South Near Ragam Theatre, Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Aaacr9026J] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(3), Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Smt.Komalam Vijayan W/O Late P.M. Vijayan, Thrissur vs. The ACIT, Thrissur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 36/COCH/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.A. Balachandran .......... Appellant Ayyappanparambil House, Mulumkunnathukavi, P.O., Thrissur 680581 [Pan: Abxpb2391K] Vs. Acit, Centralcircle, Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Assessment Year: 2008-09 Komalam Vijayan (L/H Of Late P.M. Vijayan) .......... Appellant Punchadat House, Kolazhy, Moorkkanikkara,Thrissur 680581 [Pan: Abopv0517A] Vs. Acit, Centralcircle, Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Shri.A.A. Balachandran, Thrissur vs. The ACIT, Thrissur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 35/COCH/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.A. Balachandran .......... Appellant Ayyappanparambil House, Mulumkunnathukavi, P.O., Thrissur 680581 [Pan: Abxpb2391K] Vs. Acit, Centralcircle, Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Assessment Year: 2008-09 Komalam Vijayan (L/H Of Late P.M. Vijayan) .......... Appellant Punchadat House, Kolazhy, Moorkkanikkara,Thrissur 680581 [Pan: Abopv0517A] Vs. Acit, Centralcircle, Thrissur ......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

Malini Jignesh Doshi, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 755/AHD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

compliance on part of the assessee. In the absence of any explanation or documentary evidence, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and treated the cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 17,63,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and applied

Ratnadeep Infrastructure Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Old Ward 3(1)(3), New Ward 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1491/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1490/Ahd/2025, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1491/Ahd/2025, Asst.Year 2012-13 Ratnadeep Infrastructure The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Private Limited Old Ward-3(1)(3) V/S. 126, 1St Floor New 3 (1) (2) Neelam Shopping Center Krishna Nagar Chowk Ahmedabad – 382 346 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecr 5728 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Of Even Date 01/07/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2011-2012 & 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.1490/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2011-12:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

corroborated by the high stamp duty valuation and the seller’s revised return showing the same consideration, he completed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act on 24.12.2018, determining the total income at Rs. 59,56,319/-, and initiated penalty proceedings under section

Ratnadeep Infrastructure Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Old Ward 3(1)(3) New Ward3(1)(2)), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1490/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1490/Ahd/2025, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1491/Ahd/2025, Asst.Year 2012-13 Ratnadeep Infrastructure The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Private Limited Old Ward-3(1)(3) V/S. 126, 1St Floor New 3 (1) (2) Neelam Shopping Center Krishna Nagar Chowk Ahmedabad – 382 346 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecr 5728 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Of Even Date 01/07/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2011-2012 & 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.1490/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2011-12:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

corroborated by the high stamp duty valuation and the seller’s revised return showing the same consideration, he completed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act on 24.12.2018, determining the total income at Rs. 59,56,319/-, and initiated penalty proceedings under section

Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4) Now Ward- 1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 159/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.158/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.159/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer Harivallabh Society बनाम/ Ward-3(4) V/S. Naroda Now Ward-1(2)(1) Opp. Devi Cinema Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 382 345 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Audpp 9058 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 06/01/2023 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-2012. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.158/Ahd/2023:

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

accept the same or refer the matter to the DVO before making any variation. The CIT(A) noted that the assessment order under section 143(3) was passed on 28.03.2014, while the appeal was electronically filed only on 19.01.2022, which resulted in a delay of more than seven years