← 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)

Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 286/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 32

Wherein the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal had held that: "The Ld D.R, however, placed heavy reliance on the intimation issued under section 143(1) (a) of the Act. We noticed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has held that the notional income credited to the profit and loss account cannot

Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 285/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 32

Wherein the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal had held that: "The Ld D.R, however, placed heavy reliance on the intimation issued under section 143(1) (a) of the Act. We noticed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has held that the notional income credited to the profit and loss account cannot

Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 284/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 32

Wherein the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal had held that: "The Ld D.R, however, placed heavy reliance on the intimation issued under section 143(1) (a) of the Act. We noticed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has held that the notional income credited to the profit and loss account cannot

Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 283/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 32

Wherein the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal had held that: "The Ld D.R, however, placed heavy reliance on the intimation issued under section 143(1) (a) of the Act. We noticed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has held that the notional income credited to the profit and loss account cannot

Erode Block All Cooperative Employees Cooperateive Thrift and Credit Society Ltd, Erode vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3050/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

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

Kogod Basavaraju Jayachandra, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result the ITA No

ITA 1618/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri.Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234A

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL

Kogod Basavaraju Jayachandra, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 1617/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Su Prabhat Co Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

The appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1930/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2020-21 Suprabhat Co-Operative Income Tax Officer, Ward Housing Society 19(3)(1), Mumbai 76, Suprabhat Co-Operative Pratishtha Bhavan, 3Rd & 4Th Vs. Housing Society Ltd, Bhulabhai Floor, 101, M.K. Road, Desai Road, Walkeshwar 400026 Mumbai 400020 Pan: Aaaas5937P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri. Rajendra Bhende, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Smitha V. Nair (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.05.2025 O R D E R Per: Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.12.2024, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl./Jcit (A)-1 Bengaluru/ U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. Considering The Reason For Delay Of 21 Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal As Stated By The Assessee Which Is Duly Supported By Duly Sworn Affidavit, Prima Facie Appears To Be Bonafide, Genuine & Un-Intentional, Thus, The Delay Of 21 Days Is Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri. Rajendra Bhende, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Smitha V. Nair (CIT DR)
Section 10B(8)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year

L.G Kakadia Education & Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 4, Mumbai

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

ITA 1914/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm L. G. Kakadia Education & Ito Exemption Ward 1 (4) Charitable Trust

For Appellant: Shri. Manoj Chauhan (AccountsFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (SR. DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the assessee has challenged the Section 143(1) order before the ld. CIT(A) but has been non-compliant throughout the appellate authority proceeding. 7. The assessee contended that

Fazlur Rehman Ansari, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 201/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.201/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Fazlur Rehman Ansari, Vs. Ito-27(1)(4), Vashi, Room No.336, Navi Mumbai Behind Dawar Bakery, Narayan Nagar Nss Road, Ghatkopar(West), Mumbai-400072 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Adppa 6415 R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Srinivas P., Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं

Kharak Singh, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 776/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

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 9 | P a g e ITA Nos.775

Kharak Singh, Noida vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 775/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

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 9 | P a g e ITA Nos.775

Kharak Singh, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 758/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viti)

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 9|Page ITA Nos.775, 776 & 758/Del/ 2025 treated

Marc India Limited, Delhi vs. CIT (Appeals)-29, Jhandewalan Delhi

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

ITA 5511/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR

Gurcharan Singh, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4248/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Gurcharan Singh, 12/161, Malviya Nagar, Ward-7(1), New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aakps0492G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.05.2025 Order

Section 143(1)Section 90

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 5, Chennai’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1068136164(1), dated 29.08.2024, involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. Suffice ... sole reason that he had not filed/uploaded his corresponding Form 67 on or before the prescribed “due” date in the course of section 143(1) processing, dated 18th March, 2021 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. This is what leaves the assessee aggrieved. 4. We have given our thoughtful

Chander Bhan, Hansi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hisar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4112/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Chander Bhan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 566/14, Jind Road, Ward-1, Hisar, Saniyan Mohalla, Haryana Hansi Distt., Hisar, Haryana Pan: Ayypb8380N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, 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)

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

Uttaranchal Bahuuddeshiya Vitta Evam Vikas Nigam, Dehradun vs. ITO, W- 1(1)(2), Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 127/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Uttaranchal Bahuuddeshiya Vitta Income Tax Officer, Evam Vikash Nigam, Vs. Ward-1(1)(2), 13, H.N. Janjati Nideshalya, Bhagat Subhash Road, Singh Colony, Adhoiwala, Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Pan No.Aaacu6529K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Uttaranchal Bahuuddesiiya Vitt Evam
Section 10Section 10(268)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

ITA No.127/DDN/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “DB” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Wildernest Better Living & Maintenance Co-Operative Society Limited, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 856/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.856/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Wildernest Better Living V The Income Tax Officer, Maintenance Co-Operative S Ward-6(1), Pune. Society Limited, Plot No.58, 59 & 60, Woldernest Society, Khadakwasla, Taluka Haveli, Pune – 411024. Maharashtra. Pan: Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Arpit Dnyandeo Dambhare & Shri Deepak Sasar – Ca’S Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Panaji Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2021-22 Dated

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

allowed assessee the deduction claimed u/s.80P(2)(d) of Rs.16,19,123/- without giving any reason. We have studied the entire order under section 143(1) consisting of 14 pages ITA No.856/PUN/2025 [A] and observed that nowhere the reason for disallowance is mentioned. Therefore, prima facie this order ... sustainable. 4.1 The Section 143(1) is reproduced here as under : Assessment. 143. (1) Where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, such return shall be processed in the following manner, namely:— (a) the total income

Ramesh Garware Charity Trust, Pune vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 776/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.776/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ramesh Garware Charitable V The Exemption Ward- Trust, S. 1(1), Pune. P B Box 3, Ramesh Garware Farm, Nda Road, Khadakwasla, Pune – 411023. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaatr6365D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dalpat Shah – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Vinod Pawar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax[Jcit(A)], Thiruvanantpura Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 14.08.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 11(2)Section 143(1)Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 234FSection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Smt. Nishita Nandish, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri.Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234A

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL