← 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)

The Farrukhabad District Co- Operative Bank Ltd, Fatehagarh vs. DCIT, Circle-2, (1), Farrukhabad

In the result, ground No. 6 raised by the assessee is

ITA 75/AGR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 120(4)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

The Farrukhabad District Cooperative Bank, Farrukhabad vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-2, Farrukhabad

In the result, ground No. 6 raised by the assessee is

ITA 138/AGR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 120(4)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

Sunil Kumar Singh, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6 (1), Patna

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

ITA 390/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the sale of immovable properties on which long term capital gain was derived.

Section 250Section 251(2)Section 3Section 54BSection 54F

that the assessee filed return of income on 03.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 1,61,778/- and the return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act and subsequently, the case was selected for limited scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee ... disallowing deduction claimed under Section 54F of the Act for Rs. 3,02,11,651/- and three other additions were made as per section 143(1)(a) of the Act for Rs. 11,64,260/-, as per para 3.1.1, Rs. 1,75,000/- and as per para

Hasmukhbhai Mohanlal Shah, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2221/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years:2017-18

Section 139Section 153CSection 154Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

Paresh Ajmera, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-33(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1370/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2022-23 Paresh Ajmera….…………..……..……….………….……….……….……Appellant 2/1A, Elgin Road, Bhawanipur, Kol-700020.. [Pan: Acnpa0719M] Vs. Ito, Ward-33(2), Kolkata…………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 15, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.06.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A), Ranchi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2022–23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Intimation Issued U/S 143(1) Of The Act Wherein The Cpc Allowed Tds Credit Of Rs. 52,404 Against The Total Claim Of Rs.3,32,404 Made By The Assessee In The Return Of Income.

Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh

Mange Ram, Gurugram vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 710/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Mange Ram, Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income H. No. 261, Main Pataudi Tax, Faridabad, Road, Near Hanuman Temple, Village Garoli Khurd, P.O.- Basai, Gurugram, Haryana Pan: Amwpr7462B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nian, Adv., Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, Ca Department By Ms. Amish S. Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18, Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [In Short, The “Pcit”], Faridabad’S Order Dated 04.12.2023 Having Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1058449758(1), Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Herd Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing That The Sole Substantive Issue Between The Parties Is That Of Correctness Of The Learned Lower Authorities’ Action Assessing The Assessee’S Interest Component Of Land Acquisition Compensation U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, While Invoking Section 57(Iv) R.W.S. 56(1)(A) R.W.S. 145A(B) Of The Act. 3. Learned Sr. Dr Representing The Department Vehemently Argued That The Instant Issue Is No More Res Integra In Light Of Mahender Pal Narang Vs. Cbdt (2020) 423 Itr 13 (P&H) As Well As Pcit Vs. Inderjit Singh Sodhi Huf (2024) 161 Taxmann.Com 301 (Del.) Wherein The Department Has Succeeded Before Their Lordships That The Impugned Interest Component Ought To Be Assessed As Income From “Other” Sources Only. 4. We Have Given Our Thoughtful Consideration To The Assessee’S Pleadings & Revenue’S Foregoing Vehement Contention. It Emerges That This Tribunal’S Recent Decision

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

Smt. Raj Bala, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 1142/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

expenditure of Rs. 4,92,56,413/- claimed on account of deposit in EPF/ESI as employees share while processing of return under section 143(1) which is arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding disallowance in as much ... debatable issue whether the delayed payment towards employees share in EPF/ESI is deductible or not which is beyond the scope of processing under section 143(1) and as such the disallowance made is illegal, unjustified and arbitrary. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged

Kishor Vitthal Kolhe, Jalgaon vs. DCIT-Circle-1, Jalgaon

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

ITA 1876/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kawadia (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

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

Chandrashekhar Vishnu Paranjpe (HUF), Pune vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Pune

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

ITA 1587/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora andFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

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

Duckbanglow Para Spark Welfare Society, Birbhum vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Suri, Birbhum

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

ITA 2272/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2272/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Duckbanglow Para Spark Welfare Vs Ito Ward-3(1), Suri, Birbhum Society, C/O Kowsar Ali, Dhulodanga Road Duckbanglow More, Rampurhat, Birbhum, West Bengal-731224 Pan No. :Aadad 5593 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Subhranshu Chima, Ar : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.08.2025, Passed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A), Ranchi For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Had By Mistake Filed Its Return Claiming The Status Of A Charitable Organisation Though The Assessee Did Not Have Registration U/S.12A Of The Act. It Was Submission That The Return Filed By The Assessee Came To Be Processed & The Intimation Came To Be Issued Wherein The Application Has Been Treated As Income Of The Assessee. It Was Submission That The Application Filed U/S.154 Of The Act Was Also Rejected. It Was Submission That The Against The Rejection Of Application Filed U/S.154 Of The Act The Assessee Had Filed Appeal To The Cit(A). It Was Submission That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Rejected The Appeal Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Assessee Has Filed The Return Claiming

For Appellant: Shri Subhranshu Chima, AR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन

Concord Fortune Minerals India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1650/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Concord Fortune Minerals India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle 11(1) 238A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Rabindra Sadan, Unit No.5A, 5B Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Vs. & 5C, Kolkata-700020, West 700069, West Bengal Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcc1615J Assessee By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

ITO 19 1 1, Mumbai vs. Chogaram Hiramji Devasai, Mumbai

ITA 6987/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Paranjpe, ARFor Respondent: Revenue by
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

income for the relevant year on 30.09.2011, declaring a total income of Rs. 7,16,250/-. The return of assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Further the case was reopened under section 147, thereby a notice under section 148 was issued on 08.10.2014. The revenue

Sujit Kumar Deb, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 42(1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 3565/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

Section 143(1)

order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter ‘CIT (A)’] dated 27.03.2025 arising from the order of Ld A.O.CPC in intimation under section 143(1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has filed this appeal with following grounds of appeal:- “1. The Ld. AO erred in not allowing credit

Bg Steel Private Limited, Bhiwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 6255/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vishu Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 6Section 68

ITA No. 6255/DEL/2025 M/s B G Steels Pvt Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Siddhartha Lal Trust, Chanakya Puri vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6253/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234CSection 250

ITA No. 6253/DEL/2025 Siddhartha Lal Trust vs DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE

Sun Itech and Broadcast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-24(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 3844/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs M/S Sun Itech & Ito, Ward 24(1), Delhi Broadcast Private Limited, ‘ 40/16, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110 008 (Pan: Aancs5090A) (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Ashok Mishra, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-43(1), Delhi

In the result, the assesee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2444/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2021-22 Ashok Mishra, Vs. Ito, Ward 43(1), 81-82/3, Gali Bandook Wali, Civic Centre, Metro Market, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi – 110 002 Central Delhi Delhi – 110 006 (Pan: Apcpm0132J) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms Tanya Shruti, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad in Appeal No. NFAC/2020-21/10204599 dated 28 February 2025. Return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as Act) by CPC, Bangalore for the assessment year 2020-21 dated 8.7.2022. 2. At the outset

Jaipal, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 2(5), Gurgaon

The Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 3279/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandrajaipal V Ito C/O. Kunal Aggarwal & S Ward 2(5) Associates, 226, Jmd Megapolis, Gurgaon. Haryana 2Nd Floor, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Haryana Pan: Alapj3014C Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 Order

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 44ASection 54BSection 54F

1 Jaipal Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR

Charchit Garg, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer, Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 306/IND/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 44ASection 80J

duly discharged through TDS, advance tax and self- assessment tax. 4. The return of income was processed by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act on 31.07.2024. While processing the return, the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed under section 80JJAA of the Act on the ground that ... income was determined at ₹51,07,900/-. Charchit Garg vs. ITO A.Y. 2023-24 5. Aggrieved by the intimation dated 31.07.2024 passed under section 143(1), the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals). Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee submitted that he had complied with all substantive

Shree Amizira Parshwanath Swetambar Jain Tirth Trust, Amijhera vs. ITO Dhar, Dhar

Appeal is allowed accordingly

ITA 292/IND/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2022-23 Shree Amizira Parshwanath Ito Swetamber Jain Tirth Trust Dhar बनाम/ Amzera Sardarpur Vs. Dhar (Assessee/ Appellant) (Revenue/ Respondent) Pan: Aamts9264J Assessee By Shri Himanshu Gandhi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

Audit Report dated 19/10/2018 in the prescribed Form 10B at page 15 of the Paper Book. The assessee after receiving the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act uploaded the Audit Report on 18/04/2020 in First Appellate proceedings. 5. In my considered view non-filing of Audit Report