← All Phrases

“Section 143(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)13,466 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)

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. 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.

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.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Judgments citing Section 143(1)

Ivrcl Indore Gujarat Tollways Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 760/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.760/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Ivrcl Indore Gujarat Vs. Deputy Commissioner Tollways Limited Of Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) Pan : Aacci2461C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.Manju Latha Boob, Ca, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Ms.Manju Latha Boob, CA, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 44A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Bhel Lcc Society Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 732/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.732/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bhel Lcc Society Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Circle 8(1) Pan:Aaatb6430D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Sai Keerthana राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/02/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Arising From The Penalty Order Passed U/S 270A Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: CA Sri Sai KeerthanaFor Respondent: : Shri Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 270ASection 36

ITA No 732 of 2025 BHEL LCC SOCIETY Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX

K.1316 Muthur Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society Limited, Tirupur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4) Tirupur, Tirupur

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

ITA 1497/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Ramu & Co., Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

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

ITA 1104/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 28

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Shantha Alias Shanthamma, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

ITA 465/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Deepak, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan M, CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 153C

Year (AY) 2020-21 under section 139(1) of the Act, within the prescribed time limit. The CPC also processed the return under section 143(1) of the Act, and the intimation to that effect is also on record. 34.10 It was further submitted that the assessee had entered into ... declaring total income of ₹4,46,26,820/-, which included gain from the sale of flats. The return was duly processed under section 143(1) of the Act by the CPC, Bangalore, and no discrepancies or mismatches were reported at that stage. These facts indicate that the income offered

Jignesh Naresh Jariwala, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, Mumbai

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

ITA 4673/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Milind Dattani / Ms. Nidhi JainFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha P. Kaushik (SR DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 89A

date of order 16/06/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru (for brevity the “Ld. AO”), passed under section 143(1) of the Act, date of order 22/04/2024. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: - “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ... been granted on the ground that Form 10EE has not been filed. The Ld. AO has applied provisions of section 143(1)(a)(ii) for rejecting relief u/s 89A. Aggrieved by non-grant of relief u/s 89A in the intimation dated 22.04.2024 passed by the Ld. AO, u/s 143(1

Fineotex Chemical Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT-4, Mumbai

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

ITA 3458/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjeefineotex Chemical Limited Vs Pcit-4, Room No.629, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 42-43, Manorama Chambers, S.V. Road, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 400 050 020 Pan: Aaacf8360M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Lalchand ChoudharyFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40Section 80G

processing. The assessee filed its return of income on 06/02/2021 declaring total income at Rs.29,15,66,300/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS for verification of – (i) Capital gain / loss; and (ii) loss from currency fluctuation

Akry Organics Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Central Circle 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, we allow the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80-IA(4) to the extent of ₹17,40,75,413/-, as made in the revised return of income

ITA 3014/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 80

been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 05/03/2025 passed by JCIT / Addl.CIT(A) Chennai, arising from the adjustment made under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (―the Act‖) for the assessment year 2021–22. 2. In substance, the grievance raised by the assessee is directed

Laqshya Media Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 3004/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

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

case was thereafter selected for scrutiny by notice dated 22/09/2019 under section 143(2). In the meantime, the return was processed under section 143(1) on 25/01/2020, wherein the claim of brought-forward business losses was not disturbed. During scrutiny, the learned Assessing Officer issued notice dated 26/11/2020 under section

Rahul Rameshchandra Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(3)(6), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2967/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Rahul Rameshchandra Jain Ito, Ward – 22(3)(6), Mumbai 7A/701, Shanti Niketan Chs, Vs Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Gandhinagar, Dr. E Moses Road, Mumbai – 400012. Worli, Mumbai – 400018. [Pan: Akgpj2747M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

individual, filed his return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 declaring income of Rs. 4,88,110/-. Initially, the return was processed under section 143(1). Later on, the case was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The case was reopened on the basis of information that

Microsoft Corporation (India) Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT (16) (1) Delhi, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1862/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdient (), Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआअसं.1862/िद"ी/2022 (िन.व. 2017-18) Microsoft Corporation (India) P. Ltd., 807, New Delhi House, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacm-5586-C बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 16(1), Central Revenue Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Ip Estate, Delhi अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Nageswar Rao, (Through Vc) & Parth, Advocates "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 04/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 30.06.2022, Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Shri Nageswar Rao, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That, At This Stage He Is Confining His Submissions To Ground No. 1 Of Appeal

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageswar Rao, (Through VC) &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

This return was revised on 6th July, 2018 and thereafter again revised on 31st March, 2019. The return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS by issuing notice under Section 143

Pramod Kumar Dubey, Gwalior vs. Income Tax Officer, 1(3), Gwalior

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/AGR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manuj Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 112ASection 112A(6)Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 87A

section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in appeal arising out of the intimation issued under section 143(1) by the CPC, Bengaluru on 28.02.2025, for the assessment year 2024-25. 2. Facts of the Case 2.1 The assessee, an individual resident ... total income does not exceed the threshold. 2.4 The return was processed by the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru, and intimation under section 143(1) was issued on 28.02.2025, whereby the assessee's claim of rebate under section 87A was disallowed. The tax liability of Rs. 13,319/- was upheld

Dharmvir Singh, Mainpuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4)(5), Mainpuri

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

ITA 183/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Avadhesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ AGRA (Through Physical/Virtual Hearing) BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dharamvir

Girdhari Lal Kedar Nath Singhal, Agra vs. The Income Tax Officer 1(1)(1), Agra

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

ITA 182/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahmangirdhari Lal Kedar Nath Singhal, Vs. Ito 1 (1)(1), Ff – 1, Bhagwati Complex, Agra. M.G. Road, Opp. Shah Cinema, Agra – 282 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aacfg5458N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Naveen Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Order : 03.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Naveen Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 80G

firm, filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs.5,54,200/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income–tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143

The Karnataka Multipurpose Souharda Sahakari Niyamit, Chikodi vs. E Assessment, Nipnai

ITA 122/PAN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 122/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Karnataka Multipurpose Souharda Sahakari Niyamit. Bhagyalaxmi Nagar, Chikodi, Belgavi-591201. Pan : Aaaat4824A . . . . . . . Appellant V/S National Faceless E-Asstt Centre, Delhi . . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Chetan Chougule [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/09/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1057730634(1) Dt. 06/11/2023 Passed By Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-1, Coimbatore, [‘Ld. Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Rectification Order Dt. 28/05/2021 Passed U/S 154 Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru [‘Ld. Cpc’] Anent To Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Chetan Chougule [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Satya Enterprises, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 396/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.396/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Satya Enterprises Ward No.3, Shanti Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Adcfs1415L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 292B

following the procedure like issue of notice under section 143(2)/142. This does not pro-vide accepting the return as provided under section 143(1)(a) : the officer has to complete the assessment under section 143(3) only. If an assessment is to be completed under section 143

Pavanchandra Chitfunds Pvt Ltd, Guntur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Guntur

ITA 375/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

return of income on 30.09.2014, declaring an income of Rs. 78,88,127/-. The return of income was initially processed as such under Section 143(1) of the Act, on 29.12.2014. Subsequently, the case of the assessee company was selected for scrutiny assessment under Section 143

Anil Kumar, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Hamirpur

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

ITA 83/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 83/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Anil Kumar, Ito, बनाम Vilalge Malkot, Ward, Po Lehri, Hamirpur Vs. Sarail, Bharari, H.P. 174027 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Dympk2533K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Parveen Sharma, Advocate (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.09.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.01.2025 Of Addl./Jcit(A)-7, Kolkata Fopr A.Y. 2021-22. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Parveen Sharma, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154

order passed by the Ld. CPC, Bengaluru under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and upholding the assessment framed under section 143(1) whereby the income of the father of the assessee/ appellant wrongly punched has been assessed as the income of the assessee. 3. That the order

Aditi Gupta, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward VII(1), Ludhiana

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes

ITA 195/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 195/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2023-24 Aditi Gupta, Ito, 144,Greeen Park, बनाम Ward Vii(1), Civil Lines, Ludhiana Vs. Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bcjpg0439B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Satish Gupta, Advocate, राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.09.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Of Addl./Jcit(A)-7, Kochi For A.Y. 2023-24. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Satish Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80C

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Greatway Private Limited, Opp Military Camp Gt Road Ldh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4(1), Aayakar Bhawan Rishi Nagar Ludhiana

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

ITA 234/CHANDI/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Sept 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 234/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Greatway Private Limited, Dcit, बनाम Opp. Military Camp Aayakar Bhawan G.T.Road, Rishi Nagar, Vs. Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaacg5950E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Ashish Aggarwal, C.A. राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.09.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29-01-2024 Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru.

For Appellant: Shri. Ashish Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(1)Section 234B

1 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A