← 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)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir. -4, Surat vs. Shri Hiteshkumar Laljibhai Patel, Surat

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by revenue is dismissed

ITA 295/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.295/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Income- Shri Hiteshkumar Laljibhai Tax, Central Circle-4, Surat, Room Patel, 52, Narayanmuni Nagar Vs No.508, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Society, Nani Ved Road, Surat- Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395004 Pan Aanpp 3560 B 395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 198Section 254(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सुरत "ायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL

Hasmukh Kanjibhai Tadhani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(2)(3), Surat

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

ITA 19/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.19/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Hasmukh Kanjibhai Tadhani, Vs. The Ito, 170, Vaikunth Dham Society, Ward – 3(3)(3), Laxmikant Ashram Road, Surat Katargam, Surat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafpt1257K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT (SMC) BENCH BEFORE SHRI DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं

M/S Sangam Souhard Credit Sahakari Limited, Bagalkot vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

Appeals are ALLOWED

ITA 30/PAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 001/Pan/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Bhagyalaxmi Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Mallapur, Pg Main Rd., Ghataprabha, Karnataka-591306 Pan: Aaaas5624D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent & आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 030/Pan/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S Sangam Souharda Credit Sahakari Ltd., A/P. Galgali, Taluka-Bilgi, Dist.-Bagalkot-587117 Pan: Aaeas3685G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Sateesh Nadagouda For Ita No. 001& None For Ita No. 030 [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; These Two Appeals Of Different Assessee Are Instituted U/S 253(1) Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] Against Respective Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’ Hereafter] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Sateesh Nadagouda forFor Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246(1)Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80ASection 80A(1)Section 80P

disallowing deduction claimed u/c VI-A of the Act by virtue of provisions of sub-clause (v) of clause (a) of section 143(1) of the Act. Aggrieved assessee challenged the denial of deduction before first appellate authority in an appeal u/s 246(1) of the Act. By impugned ... disallowance of deduction claimed u/c VI-A of the Act by virtue of provisions of sub- clause (v) of clause (a) of section 143(1) of the Act. When matter ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 7 ITA No.001 & 030/PUN/2023 AY 2018-19 Belated Return-143(1)(a)(v) travelled

Shri Bhagyalaxmi Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Mallapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangaluru

Appeals are ALLOWED

ITA 1/PAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 001/Pan/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Bhagyalaxmi Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Mallapur, Pg Main Rd., Ghataprabha, Karnataka-591306 Pan: Aaaas5624D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent & आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 030/Pan/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S Sangam Souharda Credit Sahakari Ltd., A/P. Galgali, Taluka-Bilgi, Dist.-Bagalkot-587117 Pan: Aaeas3685G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Sateesh Nadagouda For Ita No. 001& None For Ita No. 030 [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; These Two Appeals Of Different Assessee Are Instituted U/S 253(1) Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] Against Respective Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’ Hereafter] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Sateesh Nadagouda forFor Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246(1)Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80ASection 80A(1)Section 80P

disallowing deduction claimed u/c VI-A of the Act by virtue of provisions of sub-clause (v) of clause (a) of section 143(1) of the Act. Aggrieved assessee challenged the denial of deduction before first appellate authority in an appeal u/s 246(1) of the Act. By impugned ... disallowance of deduction claimed u/c VI-A of the Act by virtue of provisions of sub- clause (v) of clause (a) of section 143(1) of the Act. When matter ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 7 ITA No.001 & 030/PUN/2023 AY 2018-19 Belated Return-143(1)(a)(v) travelled

Shri Mahatma Basaveshwar Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamit, Belagavi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

ITA 105/PAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 105/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Mahatma Basaveshwar Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamit Chikod Rd., Nipani, Belagavi-591237. Pan: Aaaas2281C . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru (Karnataka) . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Represented Assessee By : Mr Veeranna Murgod [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 14/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By Present Appeal The Assessee Challenges Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short ‘Nfac’] Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1045262282(1) Dt. 07/09/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘The Act’] Which In Turn Ascended Out Of An Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru [In Short ‘Ao’] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [In Short ‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Veeranna Murgod [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

॥आयकरअपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजीमें॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL

DCIT Central Circle-2(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sidh Granites Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 996/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhaildcit, Central Circle-2(3) Vs. M/S Sidh Granites Pvt. Room No. 803, 8 Th Floor, Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. Pratishtha Bhavan, 21, 155B, Rabindra (Annexe), M.K.Road, Sarahi Burra Bazar, Churchgate, Kolkata – 400007 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaecs2639G Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Anil Kumar Das Respondent By : Vimal Punamiya Date Of Hearing 15.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-48, Mumbai, Dated 06.01.2023 For A.Y. 2018- 19. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition On Account Of Bogus Unsecured Loan Of Rs. 8,82,00,000/- Treated As Unexplained Cash Credit In The Books Of The Assessee U/S 68 Of The Act. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Delete, Alter, Modify, Rectify, Substitute Or Otherwise Any Or All Of The Grounds Of Appeal At Or Before The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 3. The Appellant, Therefore, Prays That On The Grounds Stated Above, The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A), Mumbai, May Be Set Aside & That Of The Assessing Officer Restored.”

For Appellant: Anil Kumar DasFor Respondent: Vimal Punamiya
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 148Section 68

P a g e | 1 DCIT ,CC-2(3) Vs. M/s Sidh Granites Pvt. Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Rahul Ranjit Bhat, Mumbai vs. Asstt. DIT CPC-Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1340/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Return Of Income As Per Rule 128(9) Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 In The Adjustment Made U/S.143(1).

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 39(1)Section 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sonam Rajesh Rateria, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4030/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Sh.. Anurag Tripathi, Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM I.T.A. No. 4030/Mum/2019 Assessment Year

M/S. Khadi Grammodhyog Pratisthan, Bikaner vs. ADIT, CPC / ITO, Ward-1(2), Bangaluru / Bikaner

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 87/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)

Delhi dated 14.02.2023 [here in after (NFAC)] for assessment year 2019-20 which in turn arise from the order dated 01.05.2020 passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, by the ADIT, CPC. 2 M/s Khadi Grammodhyog Prathisthan 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following

Amd Financial Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2042/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year

Jaison Thomas, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-70(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 160/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh.Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 90

filing the income tax return. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the intimation 2. issued under section 143(1) of the Act by CPC is bad in law and liable to be quashed inasmuch as the intimation has sought to make adjustment on account

Jaquar and Company Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-19, Delhi

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

ITA 1985/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: C: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR

M/S Sunflag Iron & Steel Co.Ltd, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inocome-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 392/NAG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.392/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S.Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. The Deputy Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of 33, Limbann Building, Income Tax, Bangalore. Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur – 440001. Pan: Abppg 5613 D Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Sanjy C.Thkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Rishi Kumar Bisen – Dr Date Of Hearing 30/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2023

Section 143(1)

assessee is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Nagpur dated 24.10.2019 emanating from the assessment order under section 143(1) Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). M/s.Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. [A] 2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee, Advocate Shri Sanjay

M/S Sulaikha Clay Mines, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 937/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 627/COCH/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 626/COCH/2022[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 625/COCH/2022[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 624/COCH/2022[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 623/COCH/2022[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Shree Umiya Cotton Ginning and Pressing P. Ltd., Amreli vs. The DCIT(CPC), Bengaluru

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

ITA 188/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 188/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Shree Umiya Cotton The Dcit (Cpc) बनाम/ Bengaluru Ginning & Pressing P. Vs. Ltd. Kunkavav Road, Amreli "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs4349F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R. Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, ""यथ" क" ओर से / Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 31/08/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 31/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.03.2022 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 03.07.2019 Passed By The Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore Under Section 143(1) Of The Income

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R
Section 143(1)Section 43BSection 44A

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the assessment order dated 03.07.2019 passed by the DCIT, CPC, Bangalore under Section 143(1) of the Income ITA No. 188/Rjt/2022 [Shree Umiya Cotton. Ginning and Pressing P. Ltd. vs. DCIT(CPC)] A. Y. 2018-19 - 2- Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ... Year 2018-19. 2. Disallowance of deduction of Rs.11,05,728/- under Section 43B of the Act made by the CPC, Bengaluru under Section 143(1) of the Act in respect of GST is the subject matter before us. 3. Today, at the time of hearing of the instant appeal