← All Phrases

“Section 139(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 139Section 139(1)7,818 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 139(1) is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 139(1)

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 241 · 2016 · High Court
791
citing judgments

A penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing incorrect particulars of income.

Judgments citing Section 139(1)

Sumedha Arora, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-67(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1399/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Saurbh Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 90Section 90(2)

shall be allowed on furnishing of Form 67 on or before due date of filing the return of income as prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act. The question thus arises as to whether where a substantial compliance has been made and Form 67 has been eventually filed albeit ... after the due date of filing of return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act, the denial of FTC would be justified. In this regard, the assessee contends that Rule 128 provides machinery for seeking relief and compliance thereof are the procedural formality which has been duly complied

Rms Club & Resorts Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7689/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

issued on 12.09.2012. In response the assessee filed letter dated 12.03.2013 along with a copy of return for AY 2007-08 filed under section 139(1) with a request that this return may be accepted as the ITR filed in response to the notice under section 153A declaring an income ... filed in response to notice under section 153A as against the income of Rs. 49,13,600/- e-filed on 30.10.2007 under section 139(1) of the Act. The explanation of the assessee has not been found to be false. It has been discarded without assigning any valid reason. Search

Dasari Bujji, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 20/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.20/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Dasari Bujji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.40-54-5/31 Ward-1(1) Sanjeevayya Colony, Visakhapatnam Near Bethadha Church, Tatichetlapalem, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Bklpd8566J]

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

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

Payal Verma (Prop. M/S Jai Vriddhi Traders), Bhilia vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(3), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 169/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Payal Verma M/S. Jai Vriddhi Traders, Ananj Mandi Line, Behind Nehru Bhawan, Supela Bhilai-490023 (C.G.) Pan : Aovpv3159G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shyamsundar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 43B

date for furnishing the return in relation to the previous year 8 Payal Verma Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. The First Appellate Authority also noticed that it is an undisputed fact that the Appellant did not charge

M/S Sanghvi Foods Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The DIT /CPC, Bengeluru

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 200/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Mongra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40ASection 43B

even when the said amount was paid before the due date of filing of the return of total income under section 139(1) of the Act and moreso ignoring the order of Hon’ble Jurisdictional ITAT Indore Bench quoted before him in the submission filed by the appellant and copy ... made therefore requires to be deleted in full.” 3. The assessee is a Private Limited Company and filed its return of income under Section 139(1) on 30.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 12,13,68,290/-. While passing the order under Section 143(1) dated 16.03.2019 the DCIT

Sh. Nand Lal, Village Thada Via Seethal, Tehsil Tijara, Alwar vs. ITO, Ward-Bhiwadi, Alwar

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

ITA 38/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 54

1), therefore, penalty u/s 271(1)(b) also initiated for non compliance of notice dated 09.07.2019 & 29.08.2019. As per proviso 3 of section 139(1) every assessee is required to furnished on or before the due date the return in respect of his income or loss in every previous year

Shambhu Dayal Harish Chand Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4000/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh
Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

1 Shambhu Dayal Harish Chand Ch. Trust IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI

Shri Rajkot Vishashrimali Jain Samaj, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/RJT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 288

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ] Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And

Shri Arun Kumar Shrivastava, Indore vs. Asstt, Director of Income Tax, Indore

ITA 98/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Shri Arun Kumar Adit, Cpc, Shrivastava, Bangalore 9, Shakti Nagar, Vs. Kanadia Road, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aopps 9595 H Assessee By Shri Soumya Bomb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(ix)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

called for because the assessee has made payments, though after due dates under PF/ESI laws but upto due date u/s 43B read with section 139(1) for filing of return. Ld. AR further submitted that in any case, no such disallowance can be made in the proceeding of section

The ADIT CPC, Bengaluru vs. Sunderlal Moolchand Jain, Indore

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 213/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S Sunderlal Moolchand Adit, Cpc, Jain Tobacconist Private Bangalore Limited, Vs. 31, Kacchi Mohalla, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaecs 7779 P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

when the said amount of Employees' Contribution towards PF and ESIC were deposited before due date of filing of income-tax return under section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Henceforth, no disallowance is called for as per section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Income

M/S Vijay Pulses, Indore vs. The ACIT 4(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 205/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Vijay Pulses, Dcit, Cpc, 12, Sajan Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaafv 9714 E Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 154Section 43B

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA

JCIT(OSD) Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Ace Mega Structure Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad Up

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4515/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 4515/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Jcit(Osd), Vs Ace Mega Structure Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1, B-47, Surya Nagar, Sahibabad, Noida, U.P.-201301 Ghaziabad, U.P.-201005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakca8694D

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh

Tge Gas Engineering Gmbh, Germany vs. DCIT, Circle Int. Taxation 3(1)(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1958/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Tge Gas Engineering Gmbh, Vs Dcit, Mildred-Scheel-Str., 1 D-53175 Circle-International Bonn, Germany, Germany. Taxation 3(1)(1), Pan-Aadct7387B Delhi. Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Aggarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Gangadhar Panda, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 14.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2018- 19 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), International Taxation 3(1)(1), Delhi Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Dated 28.07.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “D” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KUL

Jigneshbhai Rasikbhai Savalia, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 133/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.133/Srt/2023 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Jigneshbhai Rasikbhai Savalia, Income Tax Officer, Ward B/1 Bombay Market, No.1(2)(2), Aayakar Vs Umarwada, Surat-395003 Bhavan, Majura Gate, Pan No: Aobps 3537 D Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr Date Of Filing Appeal 21.02.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 09.03.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 09.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 18.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2015-16, Which In Turn Arises Out Against The Penalty Levied By Assessing Officer/ Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2)(2) Surat, Under Section 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 27.02.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Imposing Penalty Of Rs.69,210/- U/S 271B Of The I.T.Act, 1961. Jigneshbhai R. Savalia 2. It Is Therefore Prayed That Penalty Imposed By Assessing Officer & Confirmed By Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) May Please Be Deleted. 4. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Delete Any Ground(S) Either Before Or In The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271BSection 44A

crores and assessee was required to furnish audit report under section 44AB on or before due date of filing return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. Notice under section 271B r.w.s 274 dated 03.11.2017 was issued to the assessee as to why penalty @ 0.5% of turnover should ... though and to avoid the consequence. The assessee has not filed audit report before the due date of filing the returned income under section 139(1). Thus, penalty @ 0.5% on the total sales of assessee is leviable. The Assessing Officer levied the penalty of Rs.69,210/- on gross receipt

T Srinivasa Rao&Co, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 184/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

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

Sri Ranga Motors, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 179/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

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

Eastern Warehouse Corporation, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 175/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

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

Tetali Anil Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 174/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

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

The Raghunayaka Large Sized Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Chinnayyagudem vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tadepalligudem

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 267/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.255/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Unagatla Large Sized Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer Credit Society Ltd., Chagallu Mandal Ward-2 [Pan : Aaaau3979M] Tanuku आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.267/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Raghunayaka Large Sized Co- Vs. Income Tax Officer Operative Credit Society Ltd., Ward-1 D.No.10-122, Near Ramalayam Tadepalligudem Chinnayyagudem West Godavari Dist. [Pan : Aaeat9533A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P

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

Unagatla Large Sized Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Chagallu Mandal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tanuku

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 255/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.255/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Unagatla Large Sized Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer Credit Society Ltd., Chagallu Mandal Ward-2 [Pan : Aaaau3979M] Tanuku आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.267/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Raghunayaka Large Sized Co- Vs. Income Tax Officer Operative Credit Society Ltd., Ward-1 D.No.10-122, Near Ramalayam Tadepalligudem Chinnayyagudem West Godavari Dist. [Pan : Aaeat9533A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P

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