← 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)

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int. Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1592/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

case are, assessee filed its return of income on 29.11.2006 declaring income at Rs.8,11,98,063/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short „the Act‟) on returned income. Subsequently, the case was selected for reassessment and notices

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Int. Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1591/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

case are, assessee filed its return of income on 29.11.2006 declaring income at Rs.8,11,98,063/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short „the Act‟) on returned income. Subsequently, the case was selected for reassessment and notices

Dearhood Foundation, Belagavi vs. The Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 202/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.202/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2022-23 ) Dear Hood Foundation, Ddit, Vs. Plot.No.1/S,Kanbargi Cpc, Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560500. Kanabargi.S.O, Karnataka. Belgaum-590015, Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aaicd1005D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.Ar Revenue By Shri.Sanket Deshmukh.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 8

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. No.202/PAN/2025

Green Mumbay Lions Education Trust, Na vs. Arivs.Exemption Ward, Surat, Income-Tax Office Surat

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

ITA 547/SRT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.547/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing) Green Mumbay Lions Education Vs. Ito, Trust, Exemption Ward, Opp – Ratnakar Society, C/O Sgm Surat Shiroya English School, Chhapra Road, Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aatg8361Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2025

Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)(a)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(c)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234A

filed a written submission, which is reproduced at page 6 to 9 of the appellate order. The CIT(A) has extracted provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Act and observed that before making adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act, intimation has to be given

Ms Kalamandir Jewellers Ltd., Surat vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1069/SRT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Sapnesh Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Uke, Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

Second, the assessee objected to the adjustment of %93,25,310/- made by the Centralised Processing Centre while processing the return under section 143(1) of the Act, contending that the Assessing Officer, while framing the assessment under section 143(3), mechanically adopted the income processed under section 143(1 ... appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. Ground No. 3 of the appeal relates to the adjustment made under section 143(1) of the Act in respect of disallowance under section 43B thereof. 6.1 Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that while processing

Mahendra Kumar Pandya, Indore vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), Ind, Indore

ITA 343/IND/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 90Section 91

return of income for the relevant assessment year declaring his total income, which included income earned outside India. While processing the return under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), the Centralised Processing Centre disallowed the claim of foreign tax credit claimed by the assessee under ... since the same was not complied with, the claim of foreign tax credit was denied. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation/order passed under section 143(1) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised specific grounds

Jalpa Uttapal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 720/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.720/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Jalpa Uttapal Patel The Pr.Cit बनाम/ N Y Steel Corporation Ahmedabad-1 V/S. 6 Puja Apartment Ahmedabad – 380 015 Vrundavan Colony Opp. Sardar Patel Hospital Maninagar Ahmedabad – 380 008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Baxpp 4020 K (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30 /09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-1 (Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit”) Dated 26/03/2025 U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal, Has Contested The Very Exercise Of Revision Jurisdiction By The Ld. Pcit U/S.263 Of The Act. Jalpa Uttapal Patel Vs. Pcit Asst.Year : 2018-19 2

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 263Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “डी“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

Khazana Stores Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1506/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 1506/Ahd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Khazana Stores Pvt. Ltd. The Ito Gf 2 Commerce House 2 बनाम/ Ward 2(1)(1) Judges Bunglow Road, V/S. Ahmedabad 380 015 Bodakdev, Ahmedabad 380 054 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaack 7880 R (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars Revenue By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 23/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As 'Cit(A)'] Dated 07/07/2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia &For Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, अहमदाबाद न्यायपीठ "डी", अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD श्री संजय गर्ग, न्यायिक

Yash Sugars Limited, Georai vs. PCIT, Nashik-1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as Infructuous

ITA 1108/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1108/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Yash Sugars Limited, Vs. Pcit, Nashik-1 Plot No.18, Saraswati Colony, Rangar Chowk, Taluk Georai, Georai – 431 127 Maharashtra Pan : Aaacy3092K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shubham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Income Tax Officer, Ward 32(1), Kolkata vs. Satish Singh, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 449/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.449/Kol/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2018-2019) Ito, Ward-32(1), Kolkata Vs Satish Singh, 5B/H/6, Shibtala Lane, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Dswps 6446 B (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Sandip Sarkar, Jcit, Sr.Dr निर्धाररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 01.01.2025For The Assessment Year2018-2019. 2. The Issue Raised In The Appeal Of Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) In Admitting The Additional Evidence Without Allowing Reasonable Opportunity To The Assessing Officer As Per Provisions Of Rule 46A Of It Rules, 1962 & Second Issue Is Against The Deletion Of Addition Of Rs.2,75,17,500/- As Made By The Ao U/S.40A(3) Of The Act In Respect Of Commission & Salary Paid By The Assessee During The Year. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 16,36,550/-On 11/06/2019, The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 25.10.2019. Subsequently, Return Of The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Sarkar, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 40A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY

Soumik Chatterjee, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 33(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1508/KOL/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the appellant filed statement of computation of income claiming tax relief of Rs.2,20,926/- (foreign tax credit) instead of Rs.5,22,964/- as claimed in his revised return of income. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the Form 67 was not filed in time. In our opinion the foreign tax credit cannot be denied mere for the reason of late filing of form 67. We note that the case is squarely covered by the decision of coordinate Benches

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90Section 90(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH,KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1508/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2024-25

Tapan Kumar Pal, Sangrampur vs. DCIT, Circle 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessees’ are allowed

ITA 1487/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Rabiul Islam Gain Ito, Ward 49(1), Gopalpur, Sangrampur, Basirhat, Uttarapan Complex, Ultadanga, North 24 Parganas, Maniktala Civic Centre, Kolkata- Vs. West Bengal-743286 700054, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Anbpg1674J Tapan Kumar Pal Dcit, Circle 49(1) Vill-Parnaihati, P.O. Sangrampur, Uttarapan Complex, Ultadanga, North 24 Paraganas, West Maniktala Civic Centre, Kolkata- Vs. Bengal743422 700054, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Baspp1538D Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : S/Shri Sanat Kumar Raha Sandip Sarkar, Drs Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Sanat Kumar Raha
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Rabiul

Rabiul Islam Gain, Basirhat vs. ITO, Ward 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessees' are allowed

ITA 1485/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Gaurang Alloys and Iron Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1257/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountantmember & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicialmember Assessment Year: 2020-21 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata…....………..............................……….……Appellant Vs. Gaurang Alloys & Iron Ltd...………….……………………...……...…..…..Respondent 402A, Mangalam, 24/26, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kol-1.. [Pan: Aaccg1485A] Appearances By: Dr. Anup Biswas, Cit-Dr,Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order :December 23, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals)-27, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 25.02.2025Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’)For The Ay 2020-21. 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Treating The Undisclosed Cash Sales/Receipts Of Rs.7,54,07,283/- As Business Transaction & Directing The Ao To Apply G.P Rate @ 6.5% To Determine The Profit From The Undisclosed Sales/Receipts.

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar

Samsara Shipping Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 6724/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishsamsara Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, 101/102, Technopolis Knowledge Park, Mahakali Caves Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Chakala Midc S.O., Mumbai Mumbai-400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacs 9285 Q (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sandeep Bhalla & Shri Sagar Joshi Respondent By : Shri Arun Kanti Datta Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee, Against The Order Dated 27.08.2025 Of Addl./Jcit(A), Panchkula, Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2021-22. 2. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee In The Appeal Is Concerning Levy Of Interest U/S. 220(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short). Of Course, Vide Letter Dated 17.12.2025 The Assessee Has Sought To Raise An Additional Ground, Challenging The Validity Of The Order Passed U/S. 154 Of The Act On Account Of Non-Mentioning Of Document Identification Number (Din). Be That As It May, We Propose To Deal The Issue On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 156Section 220(1)Section 220(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sujit Dharamdas Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4939/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Mr. Sujit Dharamdas Patel, Acit, Central Circle-2, Ashar It Park, 6Th Floor, 101, First Floor, Patel Chambers, 13 Mathew Road, Wagle Industrial Estate, Shri Rajchandraji Marg, Vs. Thane – 400 604 Opera House, Girgaon, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan:Aafpp5737L (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah &For Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM Mr

Nikhil Ashok Shivdikar, Parel Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 20 2 4 Mumbai, Lalbaug Parel

ITA 4639/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: him.

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

Assessee filed his Return of Income on 10/01/2013 declaring income of INR.4,44,110/-. The said Return was initially processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the case of the Assessee was taken up for reassessment under Section 147 of the Act for the reasons that the Assessing

Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

ITA 1770/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

sake of convenience. ITA No. 1768/Mum/2025; (A.Y.: 2021-22) 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “I. ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT: ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust 1.1. On the facts ... being heard and the same is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and also not in accordance with the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. 1.3. The Appellant prays that the adjustment made is illegal, unwarranted and contrary to the law and may therefore kindly

Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

ITA 1769/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

sake of convenience. ITA No. 1768/Mum/2025; (A.Y.: 2021-22) 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “I. ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT: ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust 1.1. On the facts ... being heard and the same is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and also not in accordance with the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. 1.3. The Appellant prays that the adjustment made is illegal, unwarranted and contrary to the law and may therefore kindly

Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

ITA 1768/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

sake of convenience. ITA No. 1768/Mum/2025; (A.Y.: 2021-22) 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “I. ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT: ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust 1.1. On the facts ... being heard and the same is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and also not in accordance with the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. 1.3. The Appellant prays that the adjustment made is illegal, unwarranted and contrary to the law and may therefore kindly