← 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)

Om Prakash Bansal (HUF), Naya Baz Delhiar vs. Ac Circle 46(1) New Delhi, New Delh

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

ITA 2984/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaom Prakash Bansal (Huf), Vs. Acit, Circle 46(1), 3990, F/F, Naya Bazar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 006. (Pan : Aabho0485L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shir Vipul Kashyap, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.10.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)) Dated 19.04.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Brought To Our Notice Application For Admission Of Additional Grounds Of Appeal Wherein Following Additional Grounds Of Appeal Are Raised :-

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shir Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)

fresh notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued by ACIT, Circle 4(1), Gurgaon. The assessment was ultimately framed under section 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2015-16 on 14.12.2017 by ACIT, Circle – 4(1), Gurgaon. It is pertinent to note that assessment ... assessee was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 30.11.2016 by DCIT, Circle – 27(2), New Delhi. Hence, it was argued that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 12.04.2016 issued by the ITO selecting the return of assessee for A.Y. 2015-16 for scrutiny

Kishna Gears Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-14(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2885/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the order passed by the learned AO under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, dated 26.12.2018, by wrongly exercising jurisdiction and making additions on issues other than those identified for examination for Limited Scrutiny

DCIT, Central Circle-14, Delhi vs. Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 197/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parveen Aggarwal, Vs Acit, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden Central Circle-14, Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon New Delhi Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs Parveen Aggarwal, Central Circle-14, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden New Delhi Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Shri V.Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Cross-Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 27, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2022 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-27/10482/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dt. 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. Ita Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

ITA Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL

Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 178/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parveen Aggarwal, Vs Acit, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden Central Circle-14, Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon New Delhi Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs Parveen Aggarwal, Central Circle-14, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden New Delhi Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Shri V.Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Cross-Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 27, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2022 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-27/10482/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dt. 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. Ita Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

ITA Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Parv Bansal As L/H of Late Anil Kumar Bansal, New Delhi

Accordingly, Ground of appeal No.6 raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1739/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parv Bansal Vs Dcit L/H Of Late Shri Anil Kumar Central Circle-31 Bansal, 208, 2Nd Floor, S-524 New Delhi Vikas Marg Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aafpb2542K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit Vs Parv Bansal Central Circle-31 L/H Of Late Shri Anil Kumar New Delhi Bansal, 208, 2Nd Floor, S-524 Vikas Marg Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aafpb2542K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv, Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Shri Shrey Jain, Adv. & Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr & Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 254Section 68

case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act issued on 30.09.2013. Then, Ld. AO completed assessment under section 143(3) on 17.03.2015 by making additions of Rs. 126,58,85,990 u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee

Parv Bansal L/H of Late Sh. Anil Kumar Bansal, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

Accordingly, Ground of appeal No.6 raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1057/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parv Bansal Vs Dcit L/H Of Late Shri Anil Kumar Central Circle-31 Bansal, 208, 2Nd Floor, S-524 New Delhi Vikas Marg Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aafpb2542K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit Vs Parv Bansal Central Circle-31 L/H Of Late Shri Anil Kumar New Delhi Bansal, 208, 2Nd Floor, S-524 Vikas Marg Shakarpur, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aafpb2542K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv, Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Shri Shrey Jain, Adv. & Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr & Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 254Section 68

case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act issued on 30.09.2013. Then, Ld. AO completed assessment under section 143(3) on 17.03.2015 by making additions of Rs. 126,58,85,990 u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee

Six Continents Hotels Inc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1459/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

1ITA No. 373& 1459/Del/2021 Six Continents Hotel Inc. Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘D

Six Continents Hotels Inc., Usa vs. ACIT Circle- 3 (1)(2) - International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 373/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

1ITA No. 373& 1459/Del/2021 Six Continents Hotel Inc. Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘D

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT, . Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8361/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K,. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

assessee) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 30.08.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 143(3) r.w.s. 143C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) inconsonance with the order passed by the Dispute Resolution Panel-2(DRP) dated

Indo Hi Tech Industries, Bhaktinagar Station Plot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(1), It-Office

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

ITA 593/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 593/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Indo Hi Tech Industries The Ito Ward – 1(2)(1) Bhaktinagar Station Plot Street No. Vs. It-Office, Near Aayakar Bhawan, 5/10, Near Ranjit Transport Vatiaka, Rajkot (Gujrat)- 360001 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffi8696B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Adjournment Application
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 263

other materials brought on record. 15. In these appeals some of the assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act and some of the assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3 ... account treating the assessee as a businessman. For example, in ITA No. 210/Rjt/2018, for assessment year 2008-09, assessing officer framed assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act and Assessing Officer made following addition: i. Addition an account of commission income

Indo Hi Tech Industries, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 592/RJT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 592/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) Indo Hi Tech Industries The Ito Ward – 1(2)(1) Bhaktinagar Station Plot Street No. Vs. It-Office, Near Aayakar Bhawan, 5/10, Near Ranjit Transport Vatiaka, Rajkot(Gujrat) - 360001 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffi8696B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Adjournment Application
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 250Section 263

other materials brought on record. 15. In these appeals some of the assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act and some of the assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3 ... account treating the assessee as a businessman. For example, in ITA No. 210/Rjt/2018, for assessment year 2008-09, assessing officer framed assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act and Assessing Officer made following addition: i. Addition an account of commission income

Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward 1, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 144/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh Ito, Ward 1, Nr Goraba Takies Jamkhed, Vs. Ahmednagar Ahmednagar – 413201 Pan: Hozps1445M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas P Bora Department By : Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-10-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69A

High Court read as under: “1. The appeal is filed against the order of the Tribunal setting aside an order under section 143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee had initially moved the High Court relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

Tapas Kumar Sarkar, Barasat, North Twenty Four Parganas vs. I.T.O., Ward - 50(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1873/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

Tapas Kumar Sarkar, Barasat, North Twenty Four Parganas vs. I.T.O., Ward - 50(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1872/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

Suryan Namboothiry, Chennai vs. The Income Tax Officer Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Nungambakkam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2019/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Adivarahan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 144

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Suryan Namboothiry, Chennai vs. The Income Tax Officer Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Nungambakkam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2018/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Adivarahan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 144

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Makaran Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2017/CHNY/2025[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Uttamchand Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Karunakaran Srinivasan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-17(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1995/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. S. Dharshan Bothra, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1878/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

STUN areas sifMear, ‘Ay earatio, teas IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI aft sitet sitet &, Soeaer Us

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1877/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉर्ज जॉर्ज के, उपाध्यक्ष