← 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)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Hirehal Jairaj Balram, Bengaluru

ITA 1961/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: FixedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 250Section 50C

return of income under Section 139(5) of the Act on 31.05.2017 declaring total income of Rs.34,02,060/-. Return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. The case was reopened under Section 147 of the Act for escaped income chargeable to tax. Subsequently notice under Section

Anuj Kumar Jain, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4528/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4528/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Anuj Kumar Jain, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 355, Espace Nirvana County, Vs. Circle 1(1), Income Tax Office, Sector-50, South City-2, Hsiidc Complex, Shankar Chowk Road, Gurugram – 122018. Phase V, Udyog Vihar, Sector-19, Pan No.Acbpj2401K Gurugram, Haryana – 122016. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 54

break. 3. The facts of the case are that the AO had not made any assessment and had made additions under intimation section 143(1) of the 1 Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating that the additions made are not of the nature of ‘arithmetical error’ or an incorrect claim

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Jamshedpur vs. Benko Traders Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 436/RAN/2024[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.436/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Cc, Jamshedpur…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant Vs. Benko Traders Pvt. Ltd....………...….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent 119, 4Th Floor, Block D, White House, Park Stree, Wb – 700016. [Pan: Aabcb1888R] Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna For The Assessment Year 2015–16 Dated 25.09.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139 Of The Act Declaring A Total Income As Nil. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1). Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & An Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 28.11.2017 Determining The Total Income At ₹9,88,28,406. Based On Information Received From The Investigation Wing, Mumbai, Relating To Alleged Use Of Stock Exchange Platform (Bse/Nse) For Generating Fictitious Long-Term/Short-Term Capital Gains Through Certain Scripts & Alleged Accommodation Entries, The Assessing Officer Recorded Reasons Under Section 147 Of The Act. A Notice Under Section 148 Was Issued The Assessee Filed Its Return Declaring The Same Income

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

assessee filed its return of income under section 139 of the Act declaring a total income as Nil. The return was processed under section 143(1). Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and an assessment under section 143(3) was completed on 28.11.2017 determining the total income

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 56/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

declaring nil income. The return was ITA Nos. 54to56/Ind/2025 Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti vs. NeAC A.Y. 2018-19 processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 31.08.2019. Thereafter, the case was selected for complete scrutiny for the specific reason of examining “large receipts from

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda, Chhapiheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 55/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

declaring nil income. The return was ITA Nos. 54to56/Ind/2025 Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti vs. NeAC A.Y. 2018-19 processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 31.08.2019. Thereafter, the case was selected for complete scrutiny for the specific reason of examining “large receipts from

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 54/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

declaring nil income. The return was ITA Nos. 54to56/Ind/2025 Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti vs. NeAC A.Y. 2018-19 processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 31.08.2019. Thereafter, the case was selected for complete scrutiny for the specific reason of examining “large receipts from

Shrivardhan Biotech Private Limited, Kondigre vs. Income Tax Office, Ichalkaranji

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

ITA 2191/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Smt. Indira R. Adakil, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE-PRESIDENT & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

M/S B.N. Dutta, Jamshedpur vs. DCIT, Cir. 2, Durgapur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S B. N. Dutta ….…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Head Office: 518, G Road, Sonari West Layout, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831011. [Pan: Aadfb0648J] Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Durgapur……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. Khasnobis, Ca & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri H. Robindro Singh, Addl. Cit - Dr & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2025 & December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 13.02.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Partnership Firm & Engaged In The Business Of Civil Construction & Maintenance Of Civil Structures Inside Stell Plants. For The Assessment Year 2011-12, The Assessee Filed Its Return On 30.09.2011 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.36,58,080/- & Total Tax & Cess Liability Of Rs.11,30,347/- Was Discharged In Full Resulting In A Refund Of Rs.12,520/-. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed By The Cpc U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 27.01.2012. The Assessee Did Not Receive Any Information From The Cpc Either Directly By Way Of Service Of Physical Copy Of The Same Or From The Then Authorised Representative Namely Mr. S. N. Gupta. Due To Non-Receipt Of

Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

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

K1434 Senjerimalaiyadipalayam Primary Agricultural Co Opcredit Society, Coimbatore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 4(1), Coimbatore

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

ITA 2179/CHNY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. S. Padmavathyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2179/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 K1434 Senjerimalaiyadipalayam Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Primary Agricultural Co-Op. Credit Non Corporate Ward 4(1), Society, Malayadipalayam Post, Coimbatore. Sultanpet Via, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore 641 669. [Pan:Aabak0950D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Karunanandham, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Babitha, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.02.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 462 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons.

For Appellant: Shri Karunanandham, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. It is noted that the return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. Thereafter, the case was selected for limited scrutiny. After following due procedure, the Assessing Officer

Bella Vista Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6594/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2020-21 Bella Vista Co-Operative Income Tax Officer, Housing Society Limited, Ward-3(1), 7Th Floor, Bella Vista, Vs. Room No. 3, 6Th Floor, 20A Oswal Park, B Wing, Pokharan Road-2, Ashar It Park, Road No.16Z, Thane, Wagle Industrial Estate, Maharashtra–400601. Thane (West), [Pan: Aadab2432M] Maharashtra-400604. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ritesh Shiyal For Revenue : Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17-12-2025 Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru, Dated 26-09-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. The Limited Issue For Consideration In The Present Matter Relates To Claim Of Exemption U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Act By The Assessee Co-Operative Society In Respect Of Interest Income Earned On Deposits Placed With Co-Operative Banks.

For Appellant: Shri Ritesh ShiyalFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL

Vama International, Mumbai vs. ACIT 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5456/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Neelkanth Realtors Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5206/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2017-18 Neelkanth Realtors Limited, Income Tax Officer, 508, Dalamal House, Ward-3(2)(3), J.B. Marg, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Nariman Point, New Marinelines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aaaca9796N (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pratik A. Mehta For Revenue : Shri Brajendra Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17-12-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 31-07-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Briefly Stated, Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 10,71,080/-, Which Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S. 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟) Were Issued. In Response, The Assessee Filed Its Submissions From Time To Time, Thereafter The Assessment Order Was Passed By The Ao

For Appellant: Shri Pratik A. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM

Income Tax Officer/Ward-19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kruti Sandeep Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 1968/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Kruti Sandeep Shah, Ward-19(2)(2), 117, Navyug Nagar Forjet Hill 503, 5Th Floor, Vs. Road, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400007. Parel, [Pan: Aapps4121F] Mumbai-400012. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sandeep Shah For Revenue : Shri Kiran K. Chhatrapati, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17-12-2025 Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 23-01-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10. 2. Briefly The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income U/S. 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟) On 26-09-2009, Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 4,04,880/-. The Return Was Processed U/S. 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Ao Was In Receipt Of Information From The Investigation Wing That The Assessee Has Obtained Accommodation

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kiran K. Chhatrapati, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), C.R Building, ITO New Delhi vs. M M Healthcare Ltd., Pushpanjali, East Delhi, Anand Vihar, Delhi

ITA 3522/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2022-23 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. M. M. Healthcare Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Pushpanjali, East Delhi, New Delhi Anand Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm1799D (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.238/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.3522/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2022-23 M/S. M. M. Healthcare Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Pushpanjali, East Delhi, Tax, Circle-16(1), Anand Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacm1799D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, Adv. Ms. Monalisa Maity, Adv. Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.3522/Del/2025 Along With The Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No.238/Del/2025 For Assessment

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074913096(1), dated 24.03.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. The Revenue’s sole substantive ... grievance raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse the Addl./JCIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion quashing the CPC’s section 143(1) processing dated 07.08.2023 itself reading as under: “7. Decision: Appellant has raised 4 grounds of appeal. 7.1. Ground No. 1: This ground no. 1 is relates

Haddock Propbuild Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 11 (1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3348/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 199

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Pristine Mega Logistics Park Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Circle- 19(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1450/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2022-23] M/S Pristine Mega Logistics Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Park Pvt. Ltd., Cpc Bangalore, 3Rd Floor, Commercial Plaza, Vs Circle-19(1), New Delhi Wing B, Radisson Hotel, Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037 Pan:Aagcp8465R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ashok Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

section 139(1) of the Act. It has also been argued that the impugned adjustment per se is not permissible for adjustment under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued submitting that the filing of audit report is not mandatory

Jai Hind Souharda Pattin Sahakari Niyamit, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Belagavi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 168/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Jai Hind Souharda Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Bazar Road, Tal.: Hukkeri, Belgavi-591309 Pan:Aaajj0226F . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal[‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 253(1)Section 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Shri Kamleshkumar Vallabhbhai Chanchdia, Village Sardhar, Dist. Rajkot vs. The ITO-Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot

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

ITA 156/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divetia, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2 1 1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Sunali Biren Shah, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed the Cross

ITA 1726/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 on 27.01.2011 declaring a total income of ₹3,25,091/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Subsequently, based on information received from the Investigation Wing alleging misuse of the National Multi Commodity Exchange

Gujarat Vaibhav Publications Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1359/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD