← 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)

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Sapna Karnani, Tonk Phatak

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 709/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Kamal Singh, Bharatpur vs. ITO WD 1, Bharatpur

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

ITA 1106/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA (Thru: VC)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

period i.e. 09-11-2016 to 30-12-2016 in the bank account maintained with Punjab National Bank. As per the provisions of Section 139(1) of the Act, the assessee was required to file the income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18 but the assessee failed

Nanu Lal Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1024/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.A. (through VC)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhari, Addl. CIT a
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Swaminathan Sukumar, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(6), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1105/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 140B(3)Section 140B(3)(i)Section 140B(3)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 234F

case are as under: The assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income within the due date as per sections 139(1) or 139(4) of the Act. The assessee paid self- assessment income tax of Rs.3,07,667/-, interest of Rs.1,46,395/- u/s.234A, 234B ... authorities below and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal. 6. The assessee, an individual, did not file the return of income under section 139(1) or 139(4) of the Act for the A.Y. 2020-21. However, the assessee filed an Updated Return under section 139

Wns Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3762/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhriwns Global Services Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Private Limited Income-Tax-6 Plant 11, Gate No. 4, Godrej Room No. 501, 5Th Floor & Boyce Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Piroshanagar, Lbs Marg, Karve Road, Mumbai Vikhroli West, Mumbai 400020. 400079 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacw2598L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Shah & Ms. Hetal SanganiFor Respondent: Shri. Arun Kanti Datta – CIT DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DCIT, Circle- 19(1), Delhi vs. P & R Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6058/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Vs P& R Engineering Services Dcit, Circle-19(1), Pvt.Ltd., 89, Lok Nayak New Delhi Apartments, Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi-110085. Pan-Aaccp0484E Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri V. K.Agarwal, Ar Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi -31 [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 01.11.2024 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-7/10212/2017-18 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [The Act, In Short] For A.Y. 2010-11. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 27.09.2010, Declaring Loss Of Rs. 12,89,624/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened In Terms Of The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act On 30.09.2017. In Response, The Assessee Has Declared The Same Income As Was Declared In The Return Filed U/S 139(1) Of The Act. Thereafter The Ao By Alleging That The Assessee Has Received Share Application Money Of Rs. 8,28,45,000/- From Three Companies Namely, M/S Mansarovar Holdings Ltd. Rs. 4,09,00,000/-, M/S Olipha Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. Of Rs. 3,27,10,000/- & From M/S Sopan Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Of Rs. 92,35,000/- Which Companies Are Paper Companies & Made The Addition U/S 68 Of The Act Of The Entire Amount Of Loan Received From These Three Companies.

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

ITA No.6058/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4309/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4308/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Gowripatnam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tadepalligudem

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 434/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147rSection 148Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Assessee has not Page. No 2 LT.A.Nos.432, 433 & 434/VIZ/2025 Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited at filed return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. As per the information available with the department, the assessee has entered into the following transactions and has not filed return ... within the due date Page. No 3 LT.A.Nos.432, 433 & 434/VIZ/2025 Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited at under section 139(1) of the Act denied the deduction claimed by the assessee. Further, Ld. AO also treated interest of Rs.7,04,473/- earned on bank deposits as income from

Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Gowripatnam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tadepalligudem

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 433/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon'Ble**

Section 139(1)Section 147rSection 148

primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society formed for the benefit of Agricultural Farmers. Assessee has not filed return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. As per the information available with the department, the assessee has entered into the following transactions and has not filed return of income ... observing that the return was filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act and not within the due date under section 139(1) of the Act denied the deduction claimed by the assessee. Further, Ld. AO also treated interest of Rs.7,04,473/- earned on bank deposits

Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Gowripatnam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tadepalligudem

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 432/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147rSection 148Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Assessee has not Page. No 2 LT.A.Nos.432, 433 & 434/VIZ/2025 Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited at filed return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. As per the information available with the department, the assessee has entered into the following transactions and has not filed return ... within the due date Page. No 3 LT.A.Nos.432, 433 & 434/VIZ/2025 Gowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited at under section 139(1) of the Act denied the deduction claimed by the assessee. Further, Ld. AO also treated interest of Rs.7,04,473/- earned on bank deposits as income from

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 246/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 250

operative Society duly registered under the Rajasthan State Cooperative Societies Act, 1953. The assessee has not filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2013-14. As per the information available with the Income-tax Department, the assessee

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 245/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 250

operative Society duly registered under the Rajasthan State Cooperative Societies Act, 1953. The assessee has not filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2013-14. As per the information available with the Income-tax Department, the assessee

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 250

operative Society duly registered under the Rajasthan State Cooperative Societies Act, 1953. The assessee has not filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2013-14. As per the information available with the Income-tax Department, the assessee

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 250

operative Society duly registered under the Rajasthan State Cooperative Societies Act, 1953. The assessee has not filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2013-14. As per the information available with the Income-tax Department, the assessee

Vimal Kumar Attrey, Sirsa vs. ITO, Ward -1, Sirsa

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1089/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1089/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Vimal Kumar Attrey, The Ito, बनाम Srs/B-15/076, Ward 1, Street No. 2, Sirsa Vs. Old Court Colony, Sirsa Haryana 125055 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaopa0288L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Kartik Garg, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13-10-2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.11.2023 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

For Appellant: Shri. Kartik Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 10

retired on 31.08.2021. 2. That during the concerned AY 2022-23, the appellant has filed his Income Tax Return on 27.06.2022 under section 139(1) via Acknowledgment No. 707809710270622, declared total income 14,34,450/-. The copy of the Income Tax Return dated 27.06.2022 filed under section 139(1) along

Sh. Satish Kumar, Panchkula vs. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Chandigarh

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 6/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.6/Chandi/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Satish Kumar Dcit-Central Circle-1 बनाम/ (C/O Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) Sector-17 House No. 1238, Sector 22B Chandigarh-160017 Vs. Chandigarh-160022 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adrpk-8845-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Geetinder Mann (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Gurgaon [Cit(A)] Dated 10-11-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Of The Act On 26-12-2018. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee Is Application Of Higher Rate Of Tax @60% U/S 115Bbe. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Sh. Deepak Aggarwal, Panchkula vs. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Chandigarh

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 273/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 273/Chandi/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Deepak Aggarwal Dcit-Central Circle-1 बनाम/ (C/O Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) Sector-17 H.No. 3035, Sector 27D Chandigarh-160017 Vs. Chandigarh-160019 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aexpa-3768-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Geetinder Mann (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Gurgaon [Cit(A)] Dated 28-12-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Of The Act On 24-12-2018. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee Is Application Of Higher Rate Of Tax @60% U/S 115Bbe. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata vs. Flex Trade Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1828/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “सी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Kailashkumar Jain, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2070/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2070/Chny/2025 िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kailashkumar Jain, Income Tax Officer, No.46, Nambaulair Street, Vs. Non-Corp Ward-5(1) Chennai – 600 079. Chennai. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abspk-9206-D] (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,थ*/Respondent) अपीलाथ* की ओर से/Appellant By : None +,थ* की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सीʼ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र