← 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)

Bharatiya Sikshya Bikasha Sansthana, Siddhartha Nagar vs. ITO, Ambapua

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 405/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.405 & 406/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019 & 2021-2022) Bharatiya Sikshya Bikasha Vs Ito(Exemption) Ward Berhampur Sanstha, 1St Lane, Berhampur Berhampur-760002 Pan No. : Aactb 4047 N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Radha Krishna Sahu, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Radha Krishna Sahu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 143(1)

application, is not permissible in an intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act and the same is also not provided in the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. This being so, we are of the view that the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act in both the appeals

Pratheush Antony Langbein, Mulavana House, Thuruthy P.O, Vazhappally West vs. DCIT Circle Intl.Txn, Tvm, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed

ITA 507/COCH/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratheush Antony Langbein, .......... Appellant Mulavana House, Thuruthy P.O., Vazhappally West, Kottayam, Kerala. [Pan: Avgpl 2952 D] Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle International Taxation, Tvm Appellant By: Shri Tony C Kallukalam, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Tony C Kallukalam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 144C(1)Section 147Section 148Section 245M

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratheush Antony

The Kumarapuram Service Co-Operative Bank Limited No 1449 Erickavu, Alappuzha vs. ITO, Ward 2, Alappuzha

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 502/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Kumarapuram Service .......... Appellant Cooperative Bank Ltd No. 1449, Erickavu P.O., Karthikappally, Alappuzha, Kerala [Pan: Aaabt 3036 B] Vs. Ito, Ward-2, Alappuzha .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Sabu C S, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sabu C S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

Shelcon Properties P. Ltd. (supra), it is a mandatory condition, non- fulfillment of this condition renders the claim incorrect as defined in section 143(1) of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned CIT(A). Thus, this appeal filed

Ambica Education Trust, Himatnagar vs. The ADIT, CPC Present Juris. the ITO, Exemption, Palanpur

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

ITA 799/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)

both dated 30-03-2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata arising out of the intimations passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 respectively. I.T.A ... AO/CPC not allowed the exemption claimed under section 11. Assessing Officer/CPC brought the entire receipt as taxable income. On receipt intimation under section 143(1) of the Act the assessee uploaded in Form 10B and filed application for rectification under section 154 of the Act. The application of the assessee

Ambica Education Trust, Himatnagar vs. The ADIT, CPC Present Juris. the ITO, Exemption, Palanpur

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

ITA 798/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)

both dated 30-03-2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata arising out of the intimations passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 respectively. I.T.A ... AO/CPC not allowed the exemption claimed under section 11. Assessing Officer/CPC brought the entire receipt as taxable income. On receipt intimation under section 143(1) of the Act the assessee uploaded in Form 10B and filed application for rectification under section 154 of the Act. The application of the assessee

Arifkhan Munirkhan Pathan, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1142/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

assessee originally filed his return of income on 17.12.2013 declaring a total income of ₹9,28,900/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act (Act). Subsequently, the case was reopened under section 147 after recording reasons. However, the Assessing Officer noted that despite multiple

Mohammed Salim Noorbhai Shaikh, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1141/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

assessee originally filed his return of income on 17.12.2013 declaring a total income of ₹9,28,900/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act (Act). Subsequently, the case was reopened under section 147 after recording reasons. However, the Assessing Officer noted that despite multiple

Institute of Defence Studies and Research Foundation (Idsrf), Ahmedabad vs. The ITO Exemption, Ward (1), Ahmedabad.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1047/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

filed one month prior to the date of filing of return of income). Accordingly, an Intimation Order was passed under section 143(1) of the Act for Assessment Year 2023-24, in the case the assessee trust, in which a demand of ₹1,19,000/- was raised and an addition ... return of income, however, such Audit Report had been duly filed on 30.12.2023 which was prior to the intimation order passed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 29.10.2024. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the case of ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Shree

Highgrowth Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1022/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1022/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Highgrowth Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd…………..……..…………………....Appellant 42E, Cornfield Road, Ground Floor, Ballygunge, Kol-19. [Pan: Aacch0203R] Vs. Ito, Ward-12(1), Kolkata..…………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Avijit Ghoshal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Ghosh, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 13, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre Dated 15.03.2024 Passed Against The Assessment Order Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011–12. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 347 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 18.03.13 Disclosing A Loss Of Rs.11,281/-.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant

K.P.Ramaswamy, Rasipuram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Namakkal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:702/Chny/2025 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 K.P.Ramaswamy, The Income Tax Officer, 6-A, Building Society Road, Vs. Ward-2 No.5 Voc Nagar, Rasipuram Tk, Namakkal. Namakkal - 637 408. [Pan: Achpr-5024-Q] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Sri Krishna, C.A (Virtual) प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Sri Krishna, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरर, न्यागिक

Tirupur South Rotary Charitable Trust, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Exemptions, Coimbatore

In the result, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1553/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1553/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2022-23 Tirupur South Rotary Charitable Trust, Assistant Commissioner Of South Rotary Hall, Income Tax (Exemptions), Opp Nataraja Theatre, Tirupur, Coimbatore. Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu-641 604. [Pan: Aaett0308E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri S.Bhupendran, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.Krishna Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri S.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

mentioned as AAWTT0308EE20213, while fling the Return of Income for the said period. The Return of Income filed on 07/11/2022 was processed under Section 143(1) by Intimation dated 02/06/2023 by disallowing Rs. 19,00,000/- on the reason that the details mentioned in ITR regarding

Givaudan (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bengaluru, Bangalore

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

ITA 1183/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Ms. Divya Motwani, CAFor Respondent: Shri N Balusamy, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)

that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of the adjustment made by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act. The adjustment was on account of ICDS differences and sundry balances written off, amounting to ₹2,84,09,902 and ₹16,52,304 respectively. Page ... present case, the assessee filed the return of income declaring income of ₹1,74,21,80,570.00 only. This return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act after making certain upward adjustments as detailed below: • ICDS-related difference: ₹2,84,09,902.00 • Sundry balances written

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi vs. Shri Krishna Mohan Kalburgi, Hubballi

ITA 1137/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Sheshadri Chalapati, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 10Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 electronically on 26.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.35,33,480/- and the same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 29.02.2019. A search and seizure under Section 132 of the Act was initiated in the case of M/s. Dharwad Mishra

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi vs. Shri Krishna Mohan Kalburgi, Hubballi

ITA 1136/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Sheshadri Chalapati, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 10Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 electronically on 26.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.35,33,480/- and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 29.02.2019. A search and seizure under section 132 of the Act was initiated in the case of M/s. Dharwad Mishra

Zodiac Ventures Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer- 11 (3) (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4135/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Tiwari, AR
Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 199Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM

ITO(E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Basilica of Our Lady of the Mount, Mumbai

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

ITA 2927/MUM/2025[2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

Year 2023-24, date of order 28/02/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 143(1) of the Act, date of order 20/12/2024. 2 ITA 2927/Mum /2025 Basilica of our Lady of the Mount 2. The brief facts ... case are that the assessee filed the return under section 139(1) of the Act and the return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. While processing the return, the Ld.AO rejected the assessee’s claim of Rs.3 crores under section 11(3) of the Act and added

Ugc Text and Build Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1927/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 12.08.2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

Ugc Text and Build Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1926/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 12.08.2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

Ugc Text and Build Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1922/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 12.08.2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

Delhi Neurological Association, Delhi vs. ITO Ward Exemptions-1(3), Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 821/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.821/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2023-24) Delhi Neurological Association, R.No. 529, Academic Block, Department Of Neuro Surgery, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Darya Ganj, Delhi 110002 Pan: Aaajd-0582-E बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption 1(3), ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Delhi अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 24.12.2024, For Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'). The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year Declaring Nil Income. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed U/S. 143(1) Of The Act On 29.10.2024 Making Addition Of Rs.20,18,585/- As The Mandatory Audit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL