← 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)

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is disposed of in the above terms

ITA 6211/MUM/2025[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A No.6192/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1999-2000 I.T.A. No.6193/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1997-1998 I.T.A. No.6194/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akshay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is disposed of in the above terms

ITA 6209/MUM/2025[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A No.6192/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1999-2000 I.T.A. No.6193/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1997-1998 I.T.A. No.6194/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akshay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is disposed of in the above terms

ITA 6195/MUM/2025[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A No.6192/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1999-2000 I.T.A. No.6193/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1997-1998 I.T.A. No.6194/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akshay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is disposed of in the above terms

ITA 6194/MUM/2025[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A No.6192/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1999-2000 I.T.A. No.6193/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1997-1998 I.T.A. No.6194/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akshay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is disposed of in the above terms

ITA 6193/MUM/2025[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A No.6192/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1999-2000 I.T.A. No.6193/Mum/2025 A.Y.: 1997-1998 I.T.A. No.6194/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akshay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Hoshang Manekji Havewala, Mumbai

ITA 6192/MUM/2025[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

Ekesh Gaurang Desai, Mumbai vs. Central Circle - 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6116/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarekesh Gaurang Desai Vs Acit Central Circle -1(1), Mumbai C-46, Pandurang Chs, A.B. 321, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nair Road Near Juhu Post Mumbai 400020 Office, Juhu Mumbai-400049 Pan:Aibpd4569L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dharangandhi, Adv & Ms. Vinita Nara Adv Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/02/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-47, Mumbai [For Brevity ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2011-12, Date Of Order 28.07.2025. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Ld. Income-Tax Officer Ward-22(1)(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri DharanGandhi, Adv & Ms. Vinita Nara AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

Income-tax Officer Ward-22(1)(2), Mumbai 2 Ekesh Gaurang Desai (for brevity the Ld. AO), order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act, date of order 28.03.2014. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a professional engaged in architectural ... lender, despite loans exceeding Rs.26 crores having been advanced in preceding years. Reliance was also placed on the assessment order passed under section 143(3) in the case of the lender company dated 18.12.2019 for the same assessment year, wherein both its existence and capacity to advance substantial loans were

ACIT-15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Digitainment India Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 5418/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sawana & Ms. Neha
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

Delhi (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 11.06.2025, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15, which in turn arises from the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 29.12.2016, passed by Digitainment India Pvt. Ltd.. ACIT-15(1)(2), Mumbai. The grounds

Indorigin Electric Ltd, Wadala Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle 4 4 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 4682/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S. Indorigin Electric Ltd. Rectifier House, 570, Naigum Cross Road, Wadala, Mumbai- 400 031. ............... Appellant Pan: Aaaci1040B V/S Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai R. No. 424, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400 051

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Turalkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

with Rule 8D of the Rules to the tune of INR 1,74,442. 4. The AO, vide order dated 27/12/2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and computed the disallowance of INR 16,74,868 under section 14A read with ... incurred various costs towards the improvement of the plot aggregating to INR 21,57,631. 8. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) of the Act, held that the assessee has not submitted any documentary evidence for payment of expenses incurred in cash amounting

DCIT - 19(1), Mumbai, Lalbaugh vs. Bharat Ramji Bhai Manek, Grant Road Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 4339/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (SR DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 250

emanated from the order of the Ld. Income-tax Officer Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai (for brevity the Ld. AO) order passed under section 143(3) of the Act date of order 27.12.2016. 2 Bharat Ramji Bhai Manek 2. The revenue has taken the following grounds. “Grounds of Appeal

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Dr D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands

ITA 3922/MUM/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 132Section 147Section 153CSection 250Section 68

appellants submit that all the details/documents in support of the corpus donation received have been submitted during the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A. 2.2 The appellants thus, submit that the re-opening of the assessment on the same issue amounts to change of opinion, which ... exemption u/s 10 (23C) of The Act are the statements of those persons. For this year, original assessment is already completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 27 March 2014 therefore, it clearly shows that impugned assessment is a concluded assessment at the time of search. Such retracted

Rohan Landscape Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

ITA 3635/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263Section 3

proceedings. 7 Rohan Landscape Private Limited 12. After considering the submissions and material placed on record, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) accepting the returned income. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer noted the existence of high liabilities vis-à-vis income and recorded satisfaction ... impugned order dated 21 March 2025 passed under section 263 is set aside. The assessment order dated 28 September 2022 passed under section 143(3) is restored. 34. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 10th February, 2026. (ARUN KHODPIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai

ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda (E- Vijaya Bank), Mumbai

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

ITA 2942/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292Section 41

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank), Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, New Delhi

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

ITA 2533/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292Section 41

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Raman Kumar Beri, New Delhi vs. ITO-Ward 67(1), Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 263/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 263/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2022-23 Raman Kumar Beri, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O B-50, Lgf, South Extension-Ii, Ward -67(1), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abjpb5663N Assessee By: Sh. Shaantnu Jain, Adv. & Ms. Jahanvi Khanna, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2022-23 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083299198(1) Dated 04.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Shaantnu Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No

Bainu Anand Ahuja, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 71(4), Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 247/DEL/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 247/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Bainu Anand Ahuja, Vs Income Tax Officer, 4/32, West Patel Nagar, Patel Nagar, Ward-71(4), New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepa5806A Assessee By: Sh. Anoop Giri, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-2, Vadodara’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1079763436(1) Dated 20.08.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Anoop Giri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No

Satender Kumar, Sarita Vihar vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 229/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Satender Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, 56, Ali Village, Sarita Vihar, Ward-28(1), New Delhi-110076 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afxpk4995C Assessee By: None Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2020-21 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082434098(1) Dated 10.11.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

followed by issue of notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 23.11.2020. The Ld. AO completed the assessment on 22.01.2021 under section 143(3) r.w. section 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act on income returned with the observation that on aforesaid two issues no addition

S K Lumber Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 23(3), Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 211/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 211/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2022-23 S K Lumber Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 9/1, Temple Road, Bhogal, Jeewan Ward -23(3), Nagar, Gungpura, S.O. South East New Delhi-110014 Delhi, New Delhi-110014 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalcs7750D Assessee By: Ms. Tanya, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2022-23 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082574224(1) Dated 13.11.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Ms. Tanya, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No

Braham Dutt Vashist, Gurgaon vs. ITO-Ward -1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 170/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 170/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Braham Dutt Vashist, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca M. R. Sahu, Ward-1(3), H. No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector-10A, Gurgaon-122001 Near G. D. Goenka Public School, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Affpv0127D Assessee By: Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083989454(1) Dated 23.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

followed by issue of notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 23.11.2020. The Ld. AO completed the assessment on 22.01.2021 under section 143(3) r.w. section 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act on income returned with the observation that on aforesaid two issues no addition

Ras Co Op Group Housing Society Ltd, East Delhi vs. ITO, Vikas Bhawan

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 168/DEL/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 168/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Ras Co-Operative Group Housing Vs Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., 99, I. P. Extension, Ward -59(2), Patparganj, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtr6810N Assessee By: Sh. Rajat Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083399002(1) Dated 08.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Garg, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No