← All Phrases

“Section 142(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 142Section 142(1)15,051 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 142(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 142(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.

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. 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.

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.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

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. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

Judgments citing Section 142(1)

Babu Velu, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp. Cricle 9(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1583/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri. Anandd Babunath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, IRS, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, बी "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI "ी महावीर

M/S Effiel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Ld.JCIT, (OSD), Circle-1(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 543/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40Section 40aSection 56(2)(viib)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

M/S Effiel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 542/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40Section 40aSection 56(2)(viib)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 767/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 766/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 765/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 764/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 762/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 760/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 759/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 759 To 762 & 764 To 767/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri SaiyamFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144B(8)Section 151Section 271(1)(b)

case is this that during course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant did not comply with the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 fixing the date of hearing on 17.03.2022. Thereafter, the case was transferred from Faceless unit to the Ward ... appellant further placed this particular fact on record that the appellant duly made compliance in response to the notice mentioned hereinabove under Section 142(1) of the Act. Moreso, ITA Nos. 759 to 762 & 764 to 767/Ahd/2023 (Maheshbhai Prabhudas Gandhi) - 3 - the signed copy of the reason

Prafullaben Mohanlal Raval, Bhavnagar, Gujrat vs. ITO, Ward 1(8), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 743/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Aark Infosoft Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 681/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 269SSection 36(1)Section 40Section 68

section only in those cases where a return has been made under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under section 142(1), if he considers it necessary or expedient to ensure that the assessee has not understated the income or has not computed excessive loss

Mohamad Yusuf Abdulla Karbhari, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 524/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Mohamad Yusuf Abdulla The Income Tax Officer Karbhari Vs Ward-3(1)(2), Vadodara 6, Bina Nagar Society Vasna Road, Vadodara Pan: Abdpk 9291 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : -None- Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra Kamblethis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14/08/2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)” In Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: I. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Of Your Appellant, The Ld.A.O. Has Erred In Treating The Receipts Of Rs.24,58,760/- As Unexplained Cash Credit. Therefore, You Appellant Prays Your Goodself To Delete The Addition Made By The Ld.A.O. Of Rs.24,58,760/- & Request Your Goodself To Hold So. 3. Return Of Income Was Filed On 30/09/2012 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.10,06,520/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Subsequently Notice Mohamad Yusuf Abdulla Karbhari Vs. Ito Asst.Year 2012-13 2

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Rajdeep singh, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ “C”, अहमदाबाद

ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Mukesh N Shah, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 477/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 The Ito Shri Mukesh N. Shah Ward-2(1) Vs 6, Dhwani Apartments Ahmedabad Shahpur Vhai Centre Shahpur, Ahmedabad Pan: Amkps 9584 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms.Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ “A”, अहमदाबाद

M/S. Brightstar Vincom Pvt.Ltd., 700007 vs. I.T.A, Ward-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 176/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.176/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Brightstar Vincom Pvt. Ltd…..…......................…...……………....Appellant 18/1, 4Th Floor, Room No.48, M.D. Road, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aadcb2082R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3), Kolkata........…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 14, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 21, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.01.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 142(1)Section 234Section 250Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘बी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग

Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, Cer-1, Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1274/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before

Radhakrishna Agro Products, Bardhaman vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Burdwan.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1245/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Sm. PujaFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40A(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, C.C-1(1), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1232/KOL/2023[AAACV9131E]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before

M/S. Mahima Fibres Private Limited, Indore vs. The PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 163/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimahima Fibres Private Ltd. Pr. Cit, 406, Corporate House, Rnt Indore -1 Marg Vs. Indore -452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccm4603N Assessee By Shri Manoj Gupta & Pankaj Shah Ars Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2024

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY