← 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)

Sunil Kumar Choudhary HUF, Dabagardens vs. ACIT, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 470/RAN/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi02 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.470/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sunil Kumar Choudhary Huf...................…...........................……….……Appellant 30-15-138/20 Binoy Aka Complex, Opp. Bsnl Office, Andra Pradesh-530020. [Pan: Aabhs6048Q] Vs. Acit……………………..........…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar & R. R. Mittal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 2Nd , 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 07.10.2024 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. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Huf & Engaged In The Business Of Wholesaler, Transporter, Lease Rent. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,72,850/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass Followed Notices Issued U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act & Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) On 25.03.2015 With Assessed Income Of Rs.16,89,850/-. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Act. The Assessee Sought Reasons Recorded For Reopening, However The Assessing Officer Rejected Such Request Stating That The Assessee Failed To File Return In

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, RANCHI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Bishwnath Jha, Balangir vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur

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

ITA 278/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 Biswanath Jha, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Gandhinagarpara, Balangir- Sambalpur 767001 Pan/Gir No. Abtpj 6411 C (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 11/01/2024 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Sambalpur/10177/2016-17 Passed For Assessment Year 2013- 14. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 397 Days. The Assessee Has Filed 2. Condonation Petition Dated 2.5.2025 Supported By An Affidavit Stating That The Order Passed By The Ld Cit(A), Nfac Dated 11.1.2024 & The Appeal P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR

Sanjib Kumar Mohapatra, Dhenkanal vs. Income Tax Officer, Dhenkanal Ward, Dhenkanal

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

ITA 233/CTK/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sanjib Kumar Mohapatra Vs. Ito, Dhenkanal Ward, Gandhi Mandir Road, Gandhi Dhenkanal Mandir Road, Dhenkanal, 759001 Pan/Gir No. Adepm 1034 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chitrasen Parida, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 07/03/2025 In Appeal No.Nfac/2017-18/10085214 Passed For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 28.8.2018 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5,79,620/-, Which Was Processed U/S.143(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Chitrasen parida, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR

Barun Kumar Chand, Bhadrak vs. The Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Barun Kumar Chand, At-College Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak Road, Jagannathpur, Dist: Ward, Bhadrak Bhadrak-756100 Pan/Gir No. Adppc 8074 Q (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakdraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02//07/2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim kr Chakdraborty, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR

Tajuddin Khan, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Cuttack

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

ITA 217/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Tajuddin Khan Vs. Ito, Ward -1(1), Cuttack C/O Taj Plast, Plot No 81, Phase Iii, Jagatpur New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack, 754021 Pan/Gir No. Aozpk 4787 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalatendu Sahu, Ca & Manmohan Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prarteek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 2 /7/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /7/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 27/01/2025 In Appeal No. Nfac/2014-15/10247212 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual Had Not Filed The Return U/S.139 Of The Act. During The Year Under Consideration, The P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Lalatendu Sahu, CA and Manmohan Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prarteek kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 148Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR

Wilson Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 518/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 43B

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. Dhansar Engineering Company Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 295/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Satyam Sureka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Cir-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the different assessees are partly allowed

ITA 152/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. No. 13 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Satyam Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 56(2)Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. M/S. Dhansar Engineering Company Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2507/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69CSection 80G

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Vaikundaramu Kanagavalli, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-19(6), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 861/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin Gowda, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ (एस एम सी), "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI

D Rajeswari, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

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

ITA 1020/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1020/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 D. Rajeswari, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 22F, Periyar Nagar, Opp To Ward 1 (1) Kumarasamy Hospital, Erode. Erode 638 001. [Pan:Apkpr2076J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 40 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

income on 29.12.2023 admitting an income of ₹.3,32,000/-. The assessee did not comply with any of the statutory notices issued under section 143(2), 142(1) of the Act or even to show- cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer as it is reflected at para 2

Naveen Garg, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-34(1), Delhi

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 32 days in filing appeal and appeal of appellant/assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1364/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2022-23 Naveen Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward 34(1), Hd-56, M/S.Shree Bankey Delhi Bihari Pulses Pulses Mills, 2Nd Floor, Pitampura, New Delhi Pin: 1100 34 Pan No. Agdpk1562G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Manshi Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

reduce its profit/taxable income. Therefore, the genuineness/correctness of expenses related to entitles not registered under GST may be verified. 3. Notice under Section 143(2) dated 02.06.2023, notices under Section 142(1) dated 24.07.2023, 11.08.2023 and 31.08.2023, centralized communication in no-response case dated 18.09.2023, notice under Section

Ram Narayan Bajaj, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 32, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1090/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri AmanFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 124Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 274

2) of the Act. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with a specific query was issued on 04.12.2019. Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 05.12.2019. Fresh notice under Section 153A of the Act was issued. The most peculiar facts which prove that ... notice issued 142(1) of the Act is bad in law as the same was issued prior to the issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. (ii) That the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the learned

Nasalapur Mahila Pattina Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Raibag vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4, Belagavi

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

ITA 185/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.185/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Vs I.T.O Ward-4, Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Civil Hospital Road, . Nasalapur, Belgaum-590001. Chikodi, Karnataka. Belgaum-591213, . Karnataka. Pan .No. Aacan5745N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Chetan Chougle.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr

Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Mahendra Purushottam Naik Gaunekar, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

Accordingly. The ground thus stands allowed

ITA 12/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

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

Singhvi Tradelink Private Limited, Gandhidham vs. ITO, Ward - 2, Gandhidham

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

ITA 335/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: ShriD. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 on 30.11.2014.The case was taken up for limited scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) of the Income tax Act was issued on 30.08.2015. In response to the notices issued, Miss Anjali Alwani, Chartered Accountant and Authorized Representative

Shamkant Vikram Thakare, Dhule vs. ITO Ward 1, Dhule

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

ITA 905/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Pune01 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 250Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "B" "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA

Shankarrao Mohite Patil Sahakari Bank Ltd, Solapur vs. ACIT Circle 1, Solapur

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

ITA 491/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Pune01 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12 Shankarrao Mohite Patil Sahakari Acit, Circle 1, Solapur Bank Ltd. Vs. Post Box No.9 At Post Akluj, Malshiras, Solapur – 413101 Pan: Aaaas1270P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pramod S Shingte Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 01-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 40

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

Indarsen Shamlal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 699/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Ayush Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

Harsh Comtrade Pvt Ltd, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 225/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.225/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Harsh Comtrade Private Limited, Vs Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 1/A, Stuti Apartment, Near Ashok Panhouse, City Light, Surat, Gujarat Pan No. :Aabcg 8847 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.12.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059161646(1) For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Shri Mehul Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Submitted That He Has Filed Written Submissions Before The Tribunal Which Has Been Placed In The Paper Book At Pages 90 To 104 Which Reads As Follows :- Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata - 'Smc' Bench In The Case Of Harsh Comtrade Pvt. Ltd Sub: Written Submission For A.Y. 2012-13 Ref: Assessee'S Appeal No. 225/Kol/2024 Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2024 May It Please To Your Honour 1. In This Case, The Case Is Re-Opened On The Basis Of Reasons For Reopening Recorded On 23.03.2018. The Same Is Reproduced

For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR
Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन