← 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)

Incme Tax Officer 2(1), Bhopal vs. Swarna Sukh, Bhopal

ITA 691/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI

Skyhigh Infraprojects Private Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-6(1), Lucknow

ITA 242/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri, Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68

order a-fresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITA No.242/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 7 2. BECAUSE notice under section 143(2) dated 09.08.2018 issued for selection of this case for scrutiny assessment through CASS is not valid as necessary conditions specified in sub-section (2

Arvind Kumar Singh, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 802/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2016-17 Arvind Kumar Singh V. Ito-1(1) 1205/20, D- Block, Indira Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh- 57, Ram Tirath Marg, 226016. Lucknow-226001. Pan:Avups2851C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri G. S. Ojha, Adv Respondent By: Shri Puneet Kumar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 15 07 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31 07 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Ojha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

Vivek Dixit, Kanpur vs. ACIT-CC-2, Kanpur

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

ITA 258/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: None
Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.258/LKW/2024 (Assessment

Shri Jalaram Arogya Seva Trust, Sabarkantha vs. The ITO (Exemption), Palanpur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 808/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 68

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Pravinbhai Jethabhai Patel, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Nadiad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 137/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalpravinbhai Jethabhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Teen Khadki, Nr. Bar Ni Khadki, Ward-5, Village-Nar, Tal. Petlad, Nandiad. Kheda-388150. [Pan :Biqpp9029 K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Jamin Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Bp Makwana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:- This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short), U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri Jamin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri BP Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 210Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Navbharat Holidays, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1) (Previous Ward-5(2)(5)), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1753/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

preceding assessment year and current year return filed after 07.11.2016". 2.2 In the course of assessment proceedings, statutory notices were issued under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer has noted that the first notice under section 143(2) was issued through ITBA Module

M/S. Bodal Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals being IT(SS)A No

ITA 318/AHD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153A(1)(b)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद

Ganesh Subhash Dhayarkar, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 752/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bharat ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Kaluram Narayan Bhujbal, Wakad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 9(1) Pune, Pune

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

ITA 242/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Satish NadeFor Respondent: Smt. Shraddha Nichal
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel vs. Aswad Jaidas Patil, Pezari Post Poynad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 462/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Prakash G JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250(4)Section 68Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Aswad Jaidas Patil, Raigad vs. Dy, Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Panvel, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Prakash G JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250(4)Section 68Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Vensa Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 819/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.819/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Vensa Infrastructure Vs. Acit Limited Central Circle-2(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaecc7856K]

For Appellant: Shri Maheshwar Reddy, ARFor Respondent: Ms.U Mini Chandran,CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Padmavathi Morthala, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 704/HYD/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Sai KumarFor Respondent: Sri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Emaar Hills Township Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 425/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, K C DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Krypton Industries Limited, Falta vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1186/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1186/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krypton Industries Ltd.…………………..……..…………………....Appellant Plot 31 & 32, Sector-1, Falta, 24 North Parganas, W.B – 743504. [Pan: Aabck0868N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala & Vidhi Ladia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 31, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Kolkata, Dated 31.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Information Was Received From The Investigation Wing, Kolkata, Indicating That The Assessee-Company Had Taken Bogus Purchases From One Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh To Reduce Its Taxable Income. A Search Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On The Said Person & His Statement Was Recorded. Based On The Appraisal Report & Material Found During The Search, It Was Alleged That The Assessee Was One Of The Beneficiaries Of Such Bogus

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

notice under section 148 was issued. The assessee filed its return of income disclosing ₹2,29,700 in response. Subsequently, notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that in the Financial Year 2013–14, the assessee allegedly made purchases

Tapan Kumar Shaw, Naihati vs. ITO, Ward 51(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1171/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1171/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Tapan Kr. Shaw………….………..……..…………………....Appellant 331, R.B. C Road, Gorifa, Naihati, W.B 743166 [Pan: Bvups8924F] Vs. Ito, Ward-51(3), Kolkata…………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ranu Biswas, Acit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, Dated 08.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2015–16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2015–16 Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,64,330. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Primarily Due To High Cash In Hand Shown In The Balance Sheet As Compared To The Preceding Year & Late Filing Of Return After 07.11.2016. The Assessee Is Engaged In Trading Business. Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued. The Authorized Representative Appeared & Submitted Various Documents During Assessment Proceedings. During The Course Of Assessment, It Was

Section 143(3)Section 69

sheet as compared to the preceding year and late filing of return after 07.11.2016. The assessee is engaged in trading business. Notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued. The Authorized Representative appeared and submitted various documents during assessment proceedings. During the course of assessment, it was I.T.A

Binod Kumar Burnwal, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Durgapur

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

ITA 1154/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1154/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Binod Kumar Burnwal…….……...……..…………………....Appellant C/O Ghanashyam Burnwal, Banagram, Nutandanga, Gogla, Burdwan – 713383. [Pan: Aizpb0692A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Durgapur…………………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Tiwari, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 29, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.03.2025 Passed By The Nfac [In Short Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,89,094, Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass With Prior Approval Of The Competent Authority. Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued, But There Was No Compliance From The Assessee Or His Authorised Representative. In The Absence Of Proper Books Of Account Or Supporting Documents, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Collected Copies Of Audited Financial Statements From The Assessee’S Chartered Accountant. It Was Observed That During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 250

Income-tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS with prior approval of the competent authority. Statutory notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, but there was no compliance from the assessee or his authorised representative. In the absence of proper books

Greenearth Resources and Projects Limited, Kolkata vs. National E Assessment Centre, Kolkata

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

ITA 2128/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2128/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Greenearth Resources & Projects Ltd………………....Appellant Room No.866, Todi Corner, 8Th Floor, 32, Erza Street, Kol-1. [Pan: Aabcn1393B] Vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Kolkata….…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Dated 19.07.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 32 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 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68

which was subsequently revised declaring the same amount. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS, and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) were issued. However, there was no compliance from the assessee. Hence, the Assessing Officer (AO) completed

Ramakrishna Saroja, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 66/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Ramakrishna Saroja, Vs. Acit, No.807, 4Th Cross, 8Th Main Ii Block, Circle – 2(2)(1), Banashankari, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 050. Pan : Avups 0511 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. N. Vijaya Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ashwin D Gowda, Addl.Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri. N. Vijaya Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ashwin D Gowda, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 54

selected for scrutiny on the following issues: i. Capital gains / losses on sale of property ii. Investments in immovable property. 3. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 14.08.2018 was issued and served on the assessee. Subsequently other notices were issued to the assessee. From the documents submitted