← 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)

Guruvendra Singh, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 548Section 54B

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Traxit Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Assessing Officer, CPC Bangalore

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2793/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Chougule (Addl.CIT)
Section 115Section 115BSection 11BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

paid tax at Rs. 26,87,391/- under section 115BAA of the Income Tax, 1961 (the Act). The return was processed under section 143(1) and the CPC has worked out tax at Rs. 35,64,680/-. Aggrieved the assessee filed its appeal before ... concessional rate of tax under section 115BAA of the Act. Accordingly, the ld. AR prayed that the demand raised vide order passed under section 143(1) be deleted. 4 Traxit Engineers Pvt. Ltd. . 4. The ld. DR on the other hand, submitted that the assessee has not appeared before

Ankur Nahar, Bhilwara vs. CIT/ ITO, Ward-2, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing no

ITA 174/JODH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 174/Jodh/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 36(1)Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Bharat Mata Mandir Nyas, Banswara vs. ITO, Exemption, Udaipur

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

ITA 163/JODH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 80G

further challenged that the ld. AO has no jurisdiction to rejection the claim of deduction under the purview of processing of return section 143(1). I.T.A. No.163/Jodh/2022 4 Assessment Year: 2016-17 3.1 The ld. AR relied on the order of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case

Creative Integrated Facility Management, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2806/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

26/02/2022, declaring a total income of Rs. 53,66,570. The returns filed by the assessee were processed vide intimation, issued under section 143(1) of the Act, determining the total income of Rs. 57,56,600 for the assessment year

Creative Integrated Facility Management, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2805/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

26/02/2022, declaring a total income of Rs. 53,66,570. The returns filed by the assessee were processed vide intimation, issued under section 143(1) of the Act, determining the total income of Rs. 57,56,600 for the assessment year

Shubh Arya Steel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1979/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ms Padmavathy Sshubh Arya Steel Pvtltd Vs. Acit.Circle4(3)(2), 61/2, Lakri Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Darukhana, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400010. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs7868R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri C.V. Jain.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule. Sr.DR
Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MS PADMAVATHY S

DCIT Central Circle-32, New Delhi vs. Rnb Leasing and Financial Services., New Delhi

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 207/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit Vs. Rnb Leasing & Financial Central Circle Services, Rnb House 1, New Delhi Shivaji Enclave Main Road, Opp. Mother Diary Near Raja Garden New Delhi- 110027 Pan No.Aajfr5528H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.121/Del/2023 (In Ita No.207/Del/2023) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rnb Leasing & Financial Vs. Dcit Services, Rnb House 1, Central Circle Shivaji Enclave Main Road, New Delhi Opp. Mother Diary Near Raja Garden New Delhi- 110027 Pan No.Aajfr5528H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 124Section 153ASection 153D

Allahabad High Court was, whether in case of completed/unabated assessments, the AO would have jurisdiction to re-open the assessments made under Section 143(1)(a) or 143(3) of the Act, 1961 and to re- assess the total income taking notice of undisclosed income even found during the search

Shri Rajender Agarwal, Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-5, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2631/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS ASTHA

Bhanu Teja Bade, Machilipatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 255/VIZ/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.255/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Bhanu Teja Bade Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.2/451, Desaipeta Income Tax Machilipatnam Circle-1(1) [Pan : Bzipb9626D] Vijayawada (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (through web-based Hybrid Hearing platform) श्री

Jai Bheem Scheduled Caste Drivers Labour Contract Cooperative Society Limited, Rajahmundry vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 696/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.696/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Jai Bheem Scheduled Caste Vs. Income Tax Officer Drivers Labour Contract Cooperative Ward-3 Society Ltd. Rajahmundry D.No.72-3-1, Spinning Mills Road Lalacheruvu, Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaaa]7815K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम “SMC” पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी

M/S Bps Infrastructure, Baloda Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee firm in ITA No

ITA 315/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 315/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Bps Infrastructure Village- Raseda, Tehsil-Baloda Bazar, Baloda Bazar-493 332 (C.G.) Pan : Aaofb5038R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

M/S Ramesh Chemicals Inds, Bilaspur(Cg) vs. I.T.O. Ward 1(2), Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 321/BIL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 321/Rpr/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Ramesh Chemical Industries Dayalband, Bilaspur (C.G.) Pan: Aabfr3141A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Pushpa Devi Bajaj, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 816/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraastt. Year: 2014-15 Pushpa Devi Bajaj, Vs. Dcit, Ae-17, 2Nd Floor, Central Circle-32, Tagore Garden, Delhi. West Delhi, New Delhi – 110 027. Pan Abfpb2234D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 124Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

Pawan Synthetic. She filed her return for AY 2014-15 on 31.03.2015 declaring income of Rs. 2,27,880/-. It was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). Search and seizure operation was carried out on Bajaj Group of cases on 20.04.2017. The assessee ... relate to impugned additions. The Ld. AR submitted that the return for AY 2014-15 filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter a search was carried on Mr. Vikram Bajaj, Mr. Pramod Bajaj, Mr. Vinod Bajaj, Mr. Radhey Shyam Bajaj and Mr. Krishna

Late Shri Pawan Kumar L/H Smt. Nirmal Jain, Ghaziabad vs. JCIT, Range-2, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 797/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Deepanshu Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 269TSection 271ESection 274

brought to the notice by the Ld. CIT(A) that the return for A.Y. 2014-15 filed on 12.03.2015 was processed under section 143(1) of the Act and that in the order under section 143(1)(a) there was no finding by the then Ld. AO with regard

Rsb Projects Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-19(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 269/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Baldev Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

passed by the Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC Bangalore (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "The Ld. A.O.") under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "The Act"] and as upheld by the Ld. Commissioner ... civil construction activities. It filed its return for AY 2018-19 declaring income of Rs. 4,73,77,020/-. An intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) was issued on 04.06.2020 wherein an addition of Rs. 27,31,783/- was made

Jewels International, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 81/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.81/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Jewels International, Vs Dcit, Bhubaneswar A/3, Rrl Campus, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Aaatj 2593 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Written Submission Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 08.02.2023, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1049550046(1), For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee, However, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Filed Written Submission, Which Is On Record. Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Thus, We Proceeded To Dispose Off The Appeal Of The Assessee After Considering The Arguments Of The Ld. Sr. Dr & The Written Submission Filed By The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission filed)For Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

ld.DR was requested to show the copy of the show cause notice, if any issued in line with the proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act, to which the ld. DR was unable to produce any document. As the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act has been issued without ... necessary show cause notice as required under the proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act, the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act in the assessment year under consideration stands quashed. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court

Jewels International, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.77/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Jewels International, Vs Dcit, Bhubaneswar A/3, Rrl Campus, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Aaatj 2593 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 12.12.2022, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1047942924(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, It Is Noticed That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Against The Intimation Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act By The Cpc. The Ld.Dr Was Requested To Show The Copy Of The Show Cause Notice, If Any Issued In Line With The Proviso To Section 143(1) Of The Act, To Which The Ld. Dr Was Unable To Produce Any Document. As The Intimation U/S.143(1) Of The Act Has Been Issued Without The Necessary Show Cause Notice As Required Under The Proviso To Section 143(1) Of The Act, The Intimation

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

ld.DR was requested to show the copy of the show cause notice, if any issued in line with the proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act, to which the ld. DR was unable to produce any document. As the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act has been issued without ... necessary show cause notice as required under the proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act, the intimation 2 issued u/s.143(1) of the Act in the assessment year under consideration stand quashed. 3. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open

Tech Mahindra Limited (Earlier Known As Mahindra Engineering Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Range 1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2463/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Tech Mahindra Limited Dy. Cit, Range 2(2) (Earlier Known As Mahindra Mumbai Engineering Services Limited) Vs. Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 3484 F (Assessee) (Revenue) : & Asst. Cit-2(3)(1) Tech Mahindra Ltd. Mumbai (Earlier Known As Mahindra Engineering Services Ltd.) Vs. Mahindra Tower, 1St Floor, B Wing, Dr. G M Bhosale Marg, P K Kurne Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 3484 F (Revenue) : (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri Viral ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Tech

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Mahindra Engineering Services Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2282/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Tech Mahindra Limited Dy. Cit, Range 2(2) (Earlier Known As Mahindra Mumbai Engineering Services Limited) Vs. Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 3484 F (Assessee) (Revenue) : & Asst. Cit-2(3)(1) Tech Mahindra Ltd. Mumbai (Earlier Known As Mahindra Engineering Services Ltd.) Vs. Mahindra Tower, 1St Floor, B Wing, Dr. G M Bhosale Marg, P K Kurne Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 3484 F (Revenue) : (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri Viral ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Tech