“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)

Hargovind Motibhai Desai, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(7), Ahmedabad (Existing ITO Ward 3(3)(1), Ahmedabad), Vejalpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2190/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri BP Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

adjudication. ITA No.2190/Ahd/2024 for AY 2015-16 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act and all the subsequent proceeding are bad in law and therefore the Order passed by Assessing Officer is required ... expenses, rental income etc. We find that none of these issues were covered under the scope of the original limited scrutiny notice under section 143(2) and the Revenue has not brought on record any approval obtained from the competent authority for converting ITA Nos. 2190-2191/Ahd/2024 Hargovind

Sahyog Vanijya Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-11(4), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1995/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1995/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sahyog Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.………………..……..…………………....Appellant 83, Shivam Apartments, S C Road, Barat Lake Town, Kol, W.B – 700069. [Pan: Aamcs5398C] Vs. Ito, Ward-11(4), Kolkata……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Jcit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12,2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 25.05.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. At The Outset, The Registry Informed That There Is A Delay Of 428 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Such Delay Citing Valid & Proper Reasons. After Considering The Averments Made In The Application, We Condone The Delay In The Appeal. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Declaring Total Loss Of Rs.591/- . On Information Received From Ito, (Inv.), Unit-1, Kolkata That The

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant

Selvam Baskar, Salem vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Salem

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2838/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2838/Chny/2024 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Selvam Baskar Income Tax Officer, 118 – Pl Prop; Gomathy Jewellers, Vs. Ward 1(1), Gopal Chetty Street, Salem. Ponnammapet, Salem – 636 003. [Pan: Atjpb5735B] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरर, न्यागिक

Shivakumar Mahadevaiahre, Mysuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Mysuru

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

ITA 308/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18 Mr. Shivakumar Mahadevaiahre Ito B-9, 9Th Main Lalith Mahal Nagar Ward 2(3) Mysore, Karnataka 570028 Vs. Mysuru-570010 Karnataka Pan:Aczpm8866F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Sukesh Patil, Ca. Respondent By : Sri Subramanian, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 20.12.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1071397505(1) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Sri Sukesh Patil, CAFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, JCIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250

also declared agriculture income of Rs.49,75,447/-. Thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, notices under section 143(2) as well as 142(1) of the Act were issued. The Assessee furnished the submissions on various dates. The Ld. AO verified the submissions

Maddor Boraiah Shiva Kumar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 201/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sheela M G, Advocate

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 40Section 68

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

Ankur Power Project Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 15(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4432/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ankur Power Project Pvt. Ltd., Ito Ward 15(1)(1), Office No. 201, 2Nd Floor, Kailash Aayakar Bhavan, Complex, A-2, Wing, Bhandup, Vs. Mumbai-400038. West, S.O. Mumbai-400078. Pan No. Aaica 9913 H Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: None

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ

Tata Motors Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 3511/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon'Ble

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 32A

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

Laxmichand Jethalal Dedhia, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 16(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed in

ITA 2433/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

ACIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan vs. Thirumalai Chemicals Limited, Mumbai

In the result, this ground-3 of CO is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4945/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankaracit 8(3)(1), Mumbai Vs Thirumalai Chemicals Limited Plot No. 101/102, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Thirumalai House, Road No.29, Sion, Matunga, Mumbai-400 022 Pan: Aaact2015M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40A(7)Section 43BSection 90

return was revised on 23/12/2017 declaring total income at Rs.112,42,45,710/-. The case was selected under CASS and the notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. 4 ITA 4945/Mum /2024 CO 246/Mum/2024 Thirumalai Chemicals Limited During the assessment proceedings, the Ld.AO

M/S. India Exposition Mart Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1079/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhshri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra, Accountnat Member Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Khanna, C. A./NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148

LT.A. No.1079/Del/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI KULDIP

Rajulhoubienuo Angami, Nagaland vs. ITO Ward 2, Dimapur

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: This Hon'Ble Tribunal Assailing The Order Dated 24.06.2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["Ld. Cit(A)"]. That The Due Date For Filing The Appeal Was 24Th August, 2024. However, There Has Been An Unintentional Delay Of 166 Days (Upto 13Th February, 2025), In Filing The Present Appeal, For Which The Appellant, With Utmost Humility, Seeks The Indulgence Of This Hon'Ble Tribunal For Condonation Of The Said Delay On The Grounds Set Forth Herein. 2. It Is Submitted That The Mr. Shivendu Maharaj Is The Accountant Of The Appellant Who Looks After The Tax Portal & Email Updates. The Accountant Also Forwards The Needful To The Chartered Accountant, Mr. Ajit Jain, To Take Necessary Action In Response To Any Notice That Is Received.

Section 10(26)Section 147Section 250Section 69A

heard to the Appellant. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the mandatory issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not been complied in the present case. Therefore, the entire re-opening proceedings under section 147 r.w.s ... notice was issued on 24.05.2024. The Ld. AR argued that the Ld. AO's order was bad in law since no notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was given even though in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act an ITR was filed

Mangharam Moolchand Verma, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(3), Surat

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

ITA 765/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.765/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Mangharam Moolchand Verma Vs. Ito, 703, Smita Park, Sarela Wadi, Ward - 1(3)(3), Ghod Dod Road, Surat – 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abcpv1629D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayashree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2025

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(3)

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

Hussain Theparambil Faisal, Thrissur vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 520/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Hussain Theparambil Faizal .......... Appellant Theparambil, Chalingadu, Kaipamangalam Thrissur 680681 [Pan: Acvpf5761G] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-2(1), Thrissur .......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.08.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Hyderabad [Cit(A)] Dated 23.12.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Appellant Is An Individual. No Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Filed By The Appellant For Ay 2017-18. However, Based On The Information That The Appellant Made Cash Deposit In Specified Bank Notes (Sbn) During Demonetisation Period, The Ito, Ward 2(1), Thrissur (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Issued A Notice U/S. 142(1) Of The Act Calling Upon The Appellant To 2 Hussain Theparambil Faizal File Return Of Income. The Appellant Neither Complied With The Notice U/S. 142(1) Nor The Notice U/S. 143(2) Of The Act. In The Circumstances, The Ao Proceeded With Making Best Judgement Assessment By Making Addition Of The Cash Deposits Made During The Demonetisation Period As Unexplained Money Of The Appellant Vide Order Dated 29.12.2019 Passed U/S. 144 Of The Act.

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2017-18 Hussain Theparambil

Anilkumar Gopinathannair, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward 1, Tps, Palakkad

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

ITA 519/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anilkumar Gopinathan Nair .......... Appellant Sree Lakshmi, Hill View Nagar, Kanjikode Palakkad 678621 [Pan: Aiapg3415B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1 & Tps, Palakkad.......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Padmanathan K.V. Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.08.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 20.06.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Wholesale Distributor Of Fly Ash To Different Cement Manufacturing Companies. The Return Of Income For Ay 2017-18 Was Filed On 28.01.12018 Declaring Income Of Rs. 10,63,34070/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Ito, Ward-1 & Tps, Palakkad (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 21.12.2019 Passed U/S. 143(1) Of 2 Anilkumar Gopinathan Nair The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Accepting The Returned Income. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny By Issuing Notices U/S. 143(2) Of The Act On 05.08.2019 & 05.09.2019. On Verification It Was Found That The Appellant Made Cash Deposit Of Rs. 64,39,500/- Into The Bank Account Out Of Which A Sum Of Rs. 63,83,000/- Was Made In Specified Bank Notes (Sbn) During Demonetisation Period. Accordingly, The Ao Came To A Finding That The Appellant Could Deposit Only Rs. 32,25,000/- & The Balance Of Rs. 32,14,500/- Was Treated As Unexplained Deposit & Was Assessed To Tax U/S. 115Bbe Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Padmanathan K.VFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anilkumar Gopinathan

Upendra Kumar Soni, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Corcle-Kota, Kota

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 827/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69A

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

Upendra Kumar Soni, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle-Kota, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 826/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69A

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

Sh. Kapil Taneja, Jaipur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

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

Raman Goyal, Chandigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 34/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 33 & 34/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shri Raman Goyal, The Dcit, House No. 309, Sector 9, Vs Sector 17, Chandigarh. Chandigarh, "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aanpg9677J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Monga, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Ld. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, ld. CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

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