← All Phrases

“Section 143(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(2)17,209 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(2) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(2)

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

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. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

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 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.

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).

Judgments citing Section 143(2)

Sharad Kumar Choradia, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in Nos

ITA 975/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153D

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k

Babu Lal Saini, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(1), Jpr, Jaipur

ITA 749/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 54

circumstance of the case and in law the learned CIT (A) was required to quashed the assessment order as no notice under section 143(2) was issued against return filed by the assessee before completion of assessment. 3. That in the facts and circumstance of the case

M/S Kanak Vrindavan Resorts Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 37

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k

Mahalingam Sundara Moorthy, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1682/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1682/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mahalingam Sundara Moorthy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 602, Srithi Block, Chitra Avenue, Corporate Ward 4(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai. [Pan:Afypm5382G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274Section 68

return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of ₹.74,66,570/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was issued on 09.08.2018. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section

Redseer Management Consulting Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 697/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Siddanna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37Section 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

Pankaj Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy. / Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 41(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4365/MUM/2025[2014-015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2025AY 2014-015

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

17/09/2014, declaring a loss of INR 20,94,333. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the year under consideration, the assessee entered into

Sfdc Ireland Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax- 3(1)(1) Intl Tax, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1475/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the notice dated 31 May 2023 under section 143(2) of the Act issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Delhi is without jurisdiction and all proceedings pursuant to the aforesaid notice under ... section 143(2) are also without jurisdiction, had in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2 SFDC Ireland Limited, Delhi 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the final assessment order passed by the Ld. AO pursuant to the directions

Sanjeev Kumar, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6 (1), Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 264/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.264/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sanjeev Kumar...……………………………. …………………....Appellant Om Enterprises, Main Bazar, Bihta, Bihar- 801503. [Pan: Aswpk7096A] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(1), Patna……..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.01.2025 Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 56 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

Section 250

return of income declaring total income of Rs.5,53,810/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of a sum of Rs.32,77,151/- has been debited towards ‘commission

Dineshwar Prasad, Sarvadya Kamla Apartment, Boring Road vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Patna, Not Known

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

ITA 250/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.250/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dineshwar Prasad.………………………. …………………....Appellant Sarvadya Kamla Apartment, An Path, North S K Puri, Boring Road, Patna - 800013. [Pan: Acwpp8473C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-4, Patna…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.S.P Singh, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.02.2023 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 749 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

Section 250Section 69

declaring a total income of Rs.8,87,760/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and notice under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of cash deposits of Rs.56,81,000/- during the F.Y 2013-14 in assessee

Girish Chandra, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 4(3), Patna

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

ITA 615/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.615/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Girish Chandra……………………………. …………………....Appellant S/O Harsukh Rai Vyas, Nai Sarak, 11/A Devaki Complex, Chowk Patna City, Patna-800008. [Pan: Afrpc1879H] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Patna……..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pradeep Kr., Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.12.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 253 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

Section 250Section 69A

declaring a total income of Rs.2,87,560/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS and notice under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of purchase of shares by the assessee during the year amounting to Rs.7

Abinash Jha, Patna vs. ITO Ward 4(5), Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/PAT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.220/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Abinash Jha…....……………………………. …………………....Appellant Flat No.304, Gauri Shankar Complex, Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh, Patna Bihar- 800020. [Pan: Afppj3114G] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(5), Patna……..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025

Section 250

income of Rs.7,08,010/- after claiming Chapter VIA deduction. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of expenses. The AR of the assessee responded to the said notices

Labh Singh Panchkula, Panchkula vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Panchkula

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

ITA 733/CHANDI/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 733/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Labh Singh, Ito, C/O M.K.Aggarwal & बनाम Ward 2, Associates, Panchkula Vs. Sco 1,First Floor, Sector 11, Panchkula "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Didps5445F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh Rishab Gupta, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Surinder Kaur Waraich, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28-08-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.09-2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Confirming The Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessing Officer (Ao), In The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Issued Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) On Various Dates. Since The Assessee Did Not Comply With The Notices, The Ao Levied A Penalty Of ₹40,000/- Under Section 271(1)(B), Being ₹10,000/- For Each Of Four Defaults. The Learned Cit(A) Confirmed The Levy.

For Appellant: Sh Rishab Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Surinder Kaur Waraich, Addl. CIT
Section 271(1)(b)

Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO), in the course of assessment proceedings, issued statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) on various dates. Since the assessee did not comply with the notices, the AO levied a penalty of ₹40,000/- under section ... record. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceedings issued statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) on different dates. Since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Ab Alcobev Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross

ITA 360/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.356, 357, 358 & 360/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / A.Y. : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana. Vs Ab Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., 154, 1St Floor, Aggarwal Plaza-1, Anandvas Shakurpur, North West, Delhi. अपीलार्थी/Appellant स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalca0327J प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent & C.O. Nos.17 To 20/Chd/2025 In

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ, चण्डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Ab Alcobev Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross

ITA 358/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.356, 357, 358 & 360/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / A.Y. : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana. Vs Ab Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., 154, 1St Floor, Aggarwal Plaza-1, Anandvas Shakurpur, North West, Delhi. अपीलार्थी/Appellant स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalca0327J प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent & C.O. Nos.17 To 20/Chd/2025 In

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ, चण्डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Ab Alcobev Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross

ITA 357/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.356, 357, 358 & 360/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / A.Y. : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana. Vs Ab Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., 154, 1St Floor, Aggarwal Plaza-1, Anandvas Shakurpur, North West, Delhi. अपीलार्थी/Appellant स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalca0327J प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent & C.O. Nos.17 To 20/Chd/2025 In

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ, चण्डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2 Ludhiana, Ludhiana vs. Ab Alcobev Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross

ITA 356/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.356, 357, 358 & 360/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / A.Y. : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana. Vs Ab Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., 154, 1St Floor, Aggarwal Plaza-1, Anandvas Shakurpur, North West, Delhi. अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aalca0327J & C.O. Nos.17 To 20/Chd/2025 In

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ, चण्डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Dharmendra Singh, Kolkata

Appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1433/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon’Ble Itat Received From The Office Of The Pr. Cit, Central-2, Kolkata 26.06.2024 Filed 2Nd Appeal U/S 253 Before The Hon’Ble Itat, Kolkata

For Respondent: “Dates
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 68

test of fair hearing has not been satisfied in their individual cases. In all the cases, the assessees have been issued notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) they have been directed to furnish the documents, the assessee have complied with the directions, appeared before the Assessing Officer

DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Imran, Bulandshahr

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Krishna Construction Company, Rewa vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle, Katni

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 204/JAB/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 194CSection 234BSection 234DSection 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 40

extremely cryptic, perusal of the condonation petition filed by the assessee shows that the assessee did not comply with the notices issued under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. In the circumstances, the order was passed ex parte. However, we note that

The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Bhagvanji Prabhubhai Amrutiya, Morbi

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee, ( in CO No

ITA 142/RJT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.139/Rjt/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Expert Particle Board बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Survey No.111, 8-A National Vs. Highway B/H. Bharatinagar Iti, Ravapar Nadi Morbi 363 642. Pan : Aahfe 0299 G आयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.142/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.05/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bhagvaji Prabhubhai बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Amrutiya, Meera Park-2 Vs. House No.1, Vavdi Road Morbi. Pan : Aiwpa 0121 A (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20 & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, ld.CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 37Section 69ASection 69B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI