← 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)

Pooja Oberoi, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 24(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4400/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jigar MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271A

return of income on 21/08/2017, declaring a total income of INR 24,62,800. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing that the assessee has traded in the shares

Naval Kishor Mundra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for

ITA 4200/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

Balvinder Singh, Karnal, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Karnal, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4346/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

individual. He filed his return for AY 2018-19 on 29.08.2018 declaring income of Rs. 6,35,470/-. His return was processed under section 143(1)(a) on 28.06.2019. His case was selected for complete scrutiny assessment under the e- assessment Scheme, 2019 on two issues, namely refund claim ... income from other sources and claimed deduction for 50% as per section 57(iv) of the 1961 Act. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. An application under section 264 was made claiming that by mistake the assessee treated the interest income as income from other

Leelu Ram, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurugam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 896/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Leelu Ram, S/O-Mangal Singh, C/O-Ysr Gurugram & Associates, Plot No. 214, Basement, Sector-47, Haryana Pan: Apspr3189Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. M.R. Sahu, Ca Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

individual. He filed his return for AY 2018-19 on 29.08.2018 declaring income of Rs. 6,35,470/-. His return was processed under section 143(1)(a) on 28.06.2019. His case was 2 | P a g e selected for complete scrutiny assessment under the e- assessment Scheme ... income from other sources and claimed deduction for 50% as per section 57(iv) of the 1961 Act. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. An application under section 264 was made claiming that by mistake the assessee treated the interest income as income from other

Ranbir Singh Sorout, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Faridabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 54/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., the issue was highly debatable and therefore outside the purview of scope of section 143(1) of the Act. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Raj Kumar Bothra ... Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. the Assessing Officer should not have resorted to the provisions of section 143(1) for the purpose of disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF & ESI since as on the date of issuance of intimations by the AO the subject

Ranbir Singh Sorout, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Faridabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 52/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43

Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., the issue was highly debatable and therefore outside the purview of scope of section 143(1) of the Act. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Raj Kumar Bothra ... Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. the Assessing Officer should not have resorted to the provisions of section 143(1) for the purpose of disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF & ESI since as on the date of issuance of intimations by the AO the subject

Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 506/CTK/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234CSection 270ASection 92CSection 92D

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कटक पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्चुअल कोटु] [Virtual

Ban Labs Private Limited, Rajkot vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 202/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.202/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Ban Labs Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Ban House, Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Income Tax-1, Nagar, Gondal Road (South), Rajkot Rajkot-360004 (Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacb8999C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

Aalidhra Texfab Private Limited, Surat vs. CPC Current Jurisdiction- DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 153/SRT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.153/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing) Aalidhara Texfab Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Cpc, 2, Functional Estate, New Industrial Current Jurisdiction: Estate, Road No.6, Udhna, Surat – Dcit, Circle – 1(1)(1), 394210, Gujarat Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasca8215E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/08/2025

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

filed evidence in this regard before CIT(A), which was not considered. Further, the ld. AR submitted that as per the proviso to section 143(1) of the Act, no adjustment could be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustment either in writing or through ... electronic mode. The revenue has not controverted the above fact. Therefore, the above adjustment was not as per the mandate of section 143(1) of the Act. It would be proper to reproduced provisions of section 143(1) of the Act for ready refence and clarity: ITA No.153/SRT/2025/AY.2023-24 Aalidhra Texfab

Vithalbhai Harjibhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward3(2)(4), Surat

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

ITA 138/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.138/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Vithalbhai Harjibhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, 101-102, Harihari Society, Katargam Ward – 3(2)(4), Surat - 395004 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abcpp0940K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kamlesh Bhatt, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/08/2025

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

Madhya Pradesh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Tt Nagar vs. CPC Bangalore, Hobli

Appeal is allowed

ITA 62/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI

Shri Poornima Entertainments LLP, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 835/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Poornima Entertainments Llp, Flat No. A-304, Sdc Gateway, Plot No. B-1-2, Ghiya Marg Bani Park, Jaipur 302 016 Pan No.: Aeafs 8967C ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Mr. Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Ojha, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 3Section 80Section 80I

case and in law, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-6, Kolkata has erred in confirming the adjustment made in the intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("ITA"), which is outside the purview of Section 143(1). The action of the Ld. Addl. /JCIT ... under section 80IAC of the Act was duly supported by Form No. 10CCB. Assessee Appellant filed its response against the proposed adjustments under section 143(1) (a) of the Act on 09.01.2024 stating the aforementioned facts and requesting for allowing the claim of the Assessee Appellant. However, Return of Income

M/S Beeaar Autowheels India Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Lucknow-New

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 282/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2020-21 M/S Beeaar Autowheels India V. The Income Tax Officer Pvt Ltd Ward-1(3) 9, Premier Building, Shahnazaf Aaykar Bhawan, 5, Ashok Road, Lucknow-226001. Nagar, Lucknow-New, Uttar Pradesh-226001. Pan:Aadcb8897L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri Deepak Yadav, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05 06 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

contrary to the judgment of the various courts. The Ld. CIT(A) considered the provisions of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, as they stood and pointed out that as per section 143(1)(a) (iv) of the Act, disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report ... details but it did not state that the amount claimed is not allowable. Thus, it did not fulfill conditions as laid down in Section 143(1)(a) of the Act and on this ground, the disallowance was not justified. The Ld. AR also invited our attention to the recent judgment

M/S Pramod Telecom Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, Lucknow

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 243/LKW/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assessee against the orders passed by the ld. AO under section 154 r.w.s. 143(1) for the assessment year 2018-19 and under section 143(1) for the assessment year 2020-21. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. Because the CIT(A) has not given any direction ... facts of the case are that the assessee company filed a return of income on 30.10.2018 which was processed under section 143(1)(a) vide order dated 2.10.2019 at a total income of Rs. 76,82,700/- by making the following adjustments:- i. Inconsistency in provision of payment of gratuity

M/S Pramod Telecom Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, Lucknow

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 242/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assessee against the orders passed by the ld. AO under section 154 r.w.s. 143(1) for the assessment year 2018-19 and under section 143(1) for the assessment year 2020-21. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. Because the CIT(A) has not given any direction ... facts of the case are that the assessee company filed a return of income on 30.10.2018 which was processed under section 143(1)(a) vide order dated 2.10.2019 at a total income of Rs. 76,82,700/- by making the following adjustments:- i. Inconsistency in provision of payment of gratuity

Akshat Education and Charitable Trust, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward- Exemption, Vadodara

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

ITA 457/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.457/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Akshat Education & Charitable The Income Tax Officer, Trust, बनाम Ward (Exemption), / 5/35, Gosainu Faliyu, Vadodara. V/S. Asodar Borsad Road, Asodar, Anand-388307. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaeta2211K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Coimbatore [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 25.01.2025, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] For The Assessment Year 2020–21. The Impugned Order Arises Out Of The Akshat Education & Charitable Trust Vs. Ito(E) Assessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

impugned order arises out of the Akshat Education and Charitable Trust Vs. ITO(E) Assessment Year 2020-21 2 intimation issued under section 143(1) dated 30.11.2021 by the CPC, Bengaluru. Facts of the case 2. The assessee is a Public Charitable Trust, duly registered under section 12AA ... 1) stood extended to 15.02.2021, and hence both filings were beyond the statutory due date. 3. The CPC, Bengaluru processed the return under section 143(1). While doing so, it denied the exemption claimed under section 11 on the ground that the return and audit report were filed belatedly. Consequently

Gujarat Technological University, Ahmedabad, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 Exemptions, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. The said return was processed by CPC under section 143(1) on 03.06.2020, wherein the exemption claimed under section 11 was denied on the ground that details of registration under section 12A/12AA or approval under section

Sunanda Constructions, Pune vs. DCIT, Central Circle 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 784/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl.CIT
Section 132

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Sunand Constructions, Pune vs. DCIT Central Circle 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 783/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl.CIT
Section 132

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Brahmos Realty Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 9(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4119/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4119/Mum/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2024-25 Brahmos Realty Private Limited A-10002, Aristo Sappyhire, 2Nd Floor, Hasnabad Lane, Santakruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 (M.H) Pan: Aadcr5685C ...........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2)(1),Mumbai (M.H.) .......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By Revenue By : Shri B.N Rao : Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :13.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2025 2 Brahmos Realty Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-9(2)(1)

For Respondent: Shri B.N Rao
Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 250

Form No. ITR-6 and return was filed well within the time prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. 6. The provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act are clear in their requirement that prior to passing an intimation order, the Assessing Officer must provide the taxpayer with a reasonable