← 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)

Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Hq (Judl.) to CIT-14, Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM ITA

Kamlesh Khanna, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-40(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7841/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54

I T A N o . 7 8 4 1 / D E L / 2 0 1 9 S m t K

The Gokak & Mudalagi Taluka Primary Teachers Co Op Credit Society Ltd, Gokak vs. Income Tax Officer, Gokak

ITA 33/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 033/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Gokak & Mudalagi Taluka Primary Teachers Co-Op. Society, Ltd. Opp. Jss College, Falls Road, Gokak, Dist. Belagavi.-591307 Pan : Aaaat4120D . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Gokak, Belagavi. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Sateesh Nadagauda [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 15/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; By Captioned Appeal The Assessee Impugns Din & Order 1071086412(1) Dt. 11/12/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 31/03/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By National Faceless E-Asstt Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Sateesh Nadagauda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Muzaffarpur vs. Dc/Ac Circle-2, Muzaffarpur

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

ITA 186/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.186/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank……….....…..…………………....Appellant Sharma Complex, Ramna Kalambagh Chowk, Muzaffarpur, Bihar – 842002. [Pan: Aaaju0238J] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur.……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna ["Cit(A)"] For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Loss Of Rs.47,24,77,982. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Compulsory Manual Selection Criteria During The Financial Year 2017-18. Accordingly, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Were Issued & Duly Served Upon The Assessee. In Response, The Assessee Appeared & Made Certain Submissions. However, The Assessing Officer Made The Following Additions/Disallowances: Rs.16,84,20,016: Provision For Npa.

Section 36(1)(va)

case was selected for scrutiny under compulsory manual selection criteria during the financial year 2017-18. Accordingly, statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") were issued and duly served upon the assessee. In response, the assessee appeared and made certain

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 815/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

array aiteta aire iy rarauis, AGN IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,B” JAIPUR Sb Wa. Moat =a

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 814/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

array aiteta aire iy rarauis, AGN IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,B” JAIPUR Sb Wa. Moat =a

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 813/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

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

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

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

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 811/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

array aiteta aire iy rarauis, AGN IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,B” JAIPUR Sb Wa. Moat =a

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centre Circle -1, Jaipur

ITA 810/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डॉ० एस. सीतललक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1, Jaipur

ITA 809/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डॉ० एस. सीतललक्ष्मी,न्यायिक

Shri Satish Soin, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 303/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 303/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satish Soin, बनाम The Acit, House No.31, Garden Enclave, Central Circle-2, Vs South City-Ii, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Advps6254N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan Garg, Cas राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing आदेश/Order Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

issued on 07.03.2013. The assessee has filed his return of income on 31.07.2013 declaring total income at Rs.31,70,120/-. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter ld. AO has passed an assessment order under Section 153A read with Section 143

Sadulla Syed Noorsha Syed, Nanded vs. Income Tax Officer, Nanded

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

ITA 167/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.167/PUN/2025

Electromechanical Trading Pvt. Ltd., Fortuna Tower vs. ITO 5(3), Aayakar Bhawan

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

ITA 1066/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1066/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Electromechanical Trading Pvt. Ltd. …………………....Appellant 23A, Ns Road, 11Th Floor, Room No.53, Kol-1. [Pan: Adcpa8526G] Vs. Ito, Ward-5(3), Kolkata……..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vijay Kr. Singhal, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.02.2024 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 358 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. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.50,050/- Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice Under

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 144Section 250Section 68

under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny and notice under I.T.A. No.1066/Kol/2025 Electromechanical Trading Pvt. Ltd Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, calling for details and documents in support of the return filed. Despite repeated notices, the assessee did not comply

Subhendu Nandy, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(2), Burdwan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2022/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Subhendu Nandy Ito, Wd 2(2), Burdwan C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Aaykar Bhavan, Burdwan, Advocates Sagar Mansion, 2. Kachari Road, Court Compound, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite P.O. & P.S. Burdwan, Dist. Vs. Nos, 202 & 203, Hare Street, Purba, Bardhaman-713101, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aegpn0674P Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 69A

said notice is extracted below for the sake of ready reference:- “आमकर अधिनियम 1961 की िारा 143(2) के अिीि िोटिस Notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 संवीक्षा (कंप्यूिर आिाररत संवीक्षा चयि Scrutiny (Computer Alded Scrutiny Selection) महोदय/महोदया/ भेससस, Sir/Madam/ M/s, आपको सूधचत ककया

Ganesh Mahato, Durgapur, South Parganas vs. Assistant Commission of Income Tax Circle 26(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, with cost of Rs

ITA 182/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.182/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ganesh Mahato…...……………………..…………………....Appellant Vill. Durgapur, Po- Jaynagar, Majilpur, South 24 Parganas-743337. [Pan: Bgppm6996K] Vs. Acit, Circle-26(1), Kolkata ……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.12.2023 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 Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,76,470/-. The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny. Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued But She Assessee Remained Non-Compliant. The Assessing Officer Observed That Total Deposits In The Assessee'S Bank Accounts With Bank During The Period April 2016 To March 2017 Amounted To Rs.2,00,80,900, Whereas The Assessee Had Shown Only Rs.90,20,200 As Sales. The Excess Deposit Of Rs.1,10,60,700 Was Treated As Unexplained Money Under Section 69A & Added To The Income Of The Assessee.

Section 144Section 250Section 69A

that the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.3,76,470/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny. Notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued but she assessee remained non-compliant. The Assessing Officer observed that total deposits in the assessee's bank accounts

Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle -3(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 20/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

declaring the total income of ₹.17,11,070/-, as was declared in the original return. Further, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 30.11.2018 and duly served upon the assessee on 05.12.2018. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated

Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 19/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

declaring the total income of ₹.17,11,070/-, as was declared in the original return. Further, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 30.11.2018 and duly served upon the assessee on 05.12.2018. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated