← 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)

Software Point, Bhaba Nagar vs. ITO, Exemption, Berhampur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 May 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri A.K.Padhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन

Wsp Engineering Services Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1760/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1760/Del/2016 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Arun Chhabra & Ms. SuchitraFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Chand, Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM आयकरअपीलसं

M/S Ready Roti India Pvt. Ltd., F-28, Riico Industrial Area, Sare Khurd, Alwar vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 94/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. RuniPal, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance made by the CPC Bengaluru while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act is beyond the scope of provisions of section 143(1(a) of the Act and,therefore, cannot be sustained. 7. We have carefully perused the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case ... sucha situation, cannot be reason enough to disregard the binding views of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Court. To that extent, the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(iv) must be read down. What essentially follows is the adjustments under section 143(1)(a) in respect of” disallowance of expenditure indicated

Ravi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 7, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 72/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Itr. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts Of Confirming The Addition Of Rs.22,995/- Being Double Addition Of Speculative Income.’’

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT
Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance made by the CPC Bengaluru while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act is beyond the scope of provisions of section 143(1(a) of the Act and,therefore, cannot be sustained. 7. We have carefully perused the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case ... sucha situation, cannot be reason enough to disregard the binding views of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Court. To that extent, the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(iv) must be read down. What essentially follows is the adjustments under section 143(1)(a) in respect of” disallowance of expenditure indicated

A September Home Lifestyle Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 40/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Due Date Of Deposit As Mentioned In Relevant Act Despite The Fact That The Amount Was Deposited In The Relevant Fund Before Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return Under Income Tax Act, 1961.’’

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance made by the CPC Bengaluru while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act is beyond the scope of provisions of section 143(1(a) of the Act and,therefore, cannot be sustained. 7. We have carefully perused the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case ... sucha situation, cannot be reason enough to disregard the binding views of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Court. To that extent, the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(iv) must be read down. What essentially follows is the adjustments under section 143(1)(a) in respect of” disallowance of expenditure indicated

Radhey Shyam Agarwal (Deceased) Through Legal Heir, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 409/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(3)Section 35ASection 72Section 73Section 73ASection 74Section 74ASection 80

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR JhlanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt

Anagha Kishor Chaudhari, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3200/MUM/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleanagha Kishor Chaudhari V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Room No. 245-A, North Block 1505, Sea Flama Dosti Flamingo New Delhi- 110001 T J Road, Sewree Mumbai- 400015 Pan: Aakpc6578K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Kishor P. Chaudhari Department Represented By : Shri Minal Kamble

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

claimed by the assessee himself. It is an automated process subject to the permissible adjustments as provided for under the Act in section 143(1) and nothing more can be asked of it. He further observed that once a revised return is validly filed u/s. 139(5), the original return ... Page No. | 9 Anagha Kishor Chaudhari an automated process subject to the permissible adjustments as provided for under the Act in section 143(1), we are not in agreement with the above observation of the Ld.CIT(A). For the sake of clarity, Section 143(1) of the Act is reproduced

Axia Infoserve LLP, Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 3142/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleaxia Infoserve Llp V. Additional/Joint/Dy/Acit 16Th Floor, Tower 2A National E-Assessment Centre One Indiabulls Centre Delhi Senapati Bapat Road, Elphinstone Road Mumbai- 400013 Pan: Abifa7158G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department Represented By : Shri Minal Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(x)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Nela Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2966/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit (Exemption) – 2(1) V. Neia Trust Room No. 608, 6Th Floor C/O. Ecgc Of India Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill 10Th Floor, Express Tower Mumbai - 400026 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Pan: Aaatn9999F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Swastic Oil Industries, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 35/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

assessee u/s 143(1) of the Act disallowing the employee's contribution of PF/ESI deposited beyond the date in the relevant law Under Section 143(1)(a)(iv), it is asserted that only those claims or expenses, which have been identified as disallowable in the audit report but have ... intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act, on debatable and controversial issues, is beyond the scope of section 143(1) of Income Tax Act. Revenue was clearly in error, in making the aforesaid adjustments u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act on a debatable and controversial issue

Swastic Oil Industires, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

assessee u/s 143(1) of the Act disallowing the employee's contribution of PF/ESI deposited beyond the date in the relevant law Under Section 143(1)(a)(iv), it is asserted that only those claims or expenses, which have been identified as disallowable in the audit report but have ... intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act, on debatable and controversial issues, is beyond the scope of section 143(1) of Income Tax Act. Revenue was clearly in error, in making the aforesaid adjustments u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act on a debatable and controversial issue

Dynasty Modular Furnitures Private Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 99/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2023AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

confirming the action of the AO in making the adjustment in the intimation u/s 143(1) which are outside the purview of Section 143(1)(a). The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted ... income. Thus the issues involved in this appeal is as to whether this adjustment could have been made as per the provisions of Section 143(1)(a) and whether the addition made by the AO on account of employees contribution to ESI and PF by invoking the provisions of Section

Himanshu Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-6(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 253/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Shivangi Samdhani,CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(16)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154

adjustment and intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act on debtable and controversial issue is beyond the scope of Section 143(1) of Income Tax Act. Revenue was clearly in error in making the aforesaid adjustments..’’ Further reliance has been placed on the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT ... relevant extract is as under:- 4 HIMANSHU GUPTA VS ITO, WARD 6(1), JAIPUR ‘’6…… Coming to the mechanism of application of section 143(1), we find that the first proviso to section 143 (1) mandates that "no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given

Vijay Bag Singh Rajpurohit, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 591/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailvijay Bag Singh Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Rajpurohit Plot No. 4, Income Tax, Vikas Bunglow Behind Cpc Bengaluru Bahari Petrol Pump, 560100 Sion, Trombay Road Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Adqpr7848L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Vipul Shriyan Respondent By : Vranda U Matkari Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.12.2022 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Commissioner Of Income Appeals National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Ld Cit(A)) Erred In Upholding Disallowance Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1001 (The Act) By Cpc, Bengaluru Under Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act In Respect Of Employees Contribution Made To The Provided Fund & Other Funds Which Was Paid After The Due Date Prescribed Under The Respective Law But Before The End Of The Financial Year & Due Date Of Filling Return Of Income Is Covered U/S 430 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cita Erred In Noting That The Hearing Notices Were Remained Uncompiled While The Appellant Had Uploaded Request For Adjournment Against Notice Dated

For Appellant: Vipul ShriyanFor Respondent: Vranda U Matkari
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 430Section 44A

fund and ESIC fund were debatable at that point in time, so these disallowance are not covered under the ambit of provision of section 143(1) of the Act and hence the no adjustment can be made by intimation u/s 143(1) 5. Without prejudice to the above

M/S Jasani India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 546/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S Jasani India Private Vs. National E-Assessment Limited, Hw 6010, Tower Centre-Delhi, H,6Th Floor, Bharat Delhi Diamond Bourse, Bkc, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu0081C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sanket Shah Respondent By : Vranda U Matkari Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.02.2023 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. In Not Holding That The Entire Processing Was Done Without Following The Method Prescribed U/S 143(1) & That The Adjustments Made Were Beyond The Scope Of That Section. 2. In Asking The Ao To Verify Whether Or Not Rs.9,008 Of Penalty Was Compensatory In Nature - Whereas It Was Already Pleaded That This Had Been Offered To Tax. 3. In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.516,812 Being Contribution To Pf By Merely Stating That The Judgment Of The Supreme Court In Checkmate Securities P Ltd Applied To The Case-Without Appreciating The Submissions That There Was No Delay In The Making Of These Contributions.”

For Appellant: Sanket ShahFor Respondent: Vranda U Matkari
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

P a g e | 1 M/s Jasani india Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH

Newage Fire Protection Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. National Faceless Appeal, Mumbai

ITA 487/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

consideration declaring total income of Rs.2,53,85,130/- & Rs.1,87,34,870/- for A.Y. 2018-19 & 2019-20 respectively was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) making total addition of Rs.4,30,540/- & Rs.3 ... challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) contended that disallowing employees’ contribution to PF & ESIC while processing the return under section 143(1) is against the provision of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima-facie adjustment, hence liable to be allowed

Newage Fire Protection Engineers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeas National Faceless Appeal, Mumbai

ITA 486/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

consideration declaring total income of Rs.2,53,85,130/- & Rs.1,87,34,870/- for A.Y. 2018-19 & 2019-20 respectively was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) making total addition of Rs.4,30,540/- & Rs.3 ... challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) contended that disallowing employees’ contribution to PF & ESIC while processing the return under section 143(1) is against the provision of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima-facie adjustment, hence liable to be allowed

Sila Solutions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC Bangalore, Mumbai

ITA 813/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Sila Solutions Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax-Cpc, 3Rd Floor, A-301, Bangalore, Neelam Centre, Karnataka – 560 500 Vs. Baburao Pendharkar Marg, Glaxo, Worli, Mumbai City– 400 030 Pan: Aancs3675D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Vaidya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(2)(va)

challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) contended that disallowing employees’ contribution to PF & ESIC while processing the return under section 143(1) is against the provision of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima-facie adjustment, hence liable to be allowed

Angadpal Industries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 273/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

assessee company’s return of income file for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs.46,43,310/- was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) by declining the deductions claimed by the assessee company qua delayed payment of employees’ contribution ... challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) contended that disallowing employees’ contribution to PF & ESIC while processing the return under section 143(1) is against the provision of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima-facie adjustment, hence liable to be allowed

Ingredion India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2532/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92D

starting point for computing the total assessed income of the Appellant in the final assessment order as income as per intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act at INR 2,07,90,823 instead of INR 1,43,07,190 as per the draft assessment order and also ... under consideration. As per the assessee, while computing the assessed income in the final assessment order, the AO considered the income processed under section 143(1) of the Act, as the starting point, instead of the returned income, which was considered in the draft assessment order. As per the assessee