← 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)

M/S. Shanti Creators (Pvt.) Ltd., Patna vs. ACIT, Patna

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 164/PAT/2013[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2025AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 164/Pat/2013 Assessment Year: 1993-1994 & I.T.A. No. 165/Pat/2013 Assessment Year: 1994-1995 &

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 245H

ITAT, Patna during first round of litigation, the ld. Assessing Officer had issued notices to the appellant-assessee for all these appeals under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act and in response to the notices, one Shri S.N. Sinha, Advocate appeared and submitted his submissions. After considering

Mr. Jobanji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO. Ward-3(2)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 264/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.264/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Mr. Jobanji Thakor The Ito F-40, Abugiri Society बनाम / Ward-3(2)(2) Tal. Daskroi, Jagatpur V/S. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad - 382 470 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aknpt 2930 M (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 19/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"] Dated 28.12.2018, Confirming The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

sale consideration shown in the Income Tax Return (ITR) was lower than the valuation by the Stamp Duty Authority. Consequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 18.09.2017 and served via speed post, with a hearing fixed on 03.10.2017. Subsequently, notice under Section

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1416/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 80I

which is before the date of search i.e., dated 18.12.2014 in the present case. Once the proceedings are initiated by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act, before the date of search, then, as per the proviso to section 153A, the assessment shall “abate” and the Assessing Officer

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2), Hyderbad vs. Sew Infrastucture Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1723/HYD/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

which is before the date of search i.e., dated 18.12.2014 in the present case. Once the proceedings are initiated by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act, before the date of search, then, as per the proviso to section 153A, the assessment shall “abate” and the Assessing Officer ... that point of time assessment in the case of assessee for the assessment year 2008-09 was pending scrutiny since notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued and assessment was not completed. Therefore, in view of the second proviso to Section 153A of the said Act, once

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1722/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1721/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

which is before the date of search i.e., dated 18.12.2014 in the present case. Once the proceedings are initiated by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act, before the date of search, then, as per the proviso to section 153A, the assessment shall “abate” and the Assessing Officer

Prahalad Rai Sutodia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 36(5), Kolkata

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

ITA 912/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 912/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Prahalad Rai Sutodia,………………….....……Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Sagar Mansion”, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite Nos. 202 & 203, Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Arsps6928G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-36(5), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 6Th Floor, Eastern Metropolitan By Pass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Bank account during the demonetization period of 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016. The case was selected for limited scrutiny by CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.09.2018 by ITO, Ward-35(1), Kolkata from ITBA and duly served on the assessee. Further notice

Intimate Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 539/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 539/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Intimate Commotrade Private Limited,……Appellant 5/1, 4Th Floor, Room No. 125, Clive Row, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aacci4983R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-6(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148

issued to the assessee on 27.03.2019. The assessee filed its return on 08.04.2019 with a total income at ‘NIL and again notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee, but no compliance was received from the assessee. Finally, a show-cause notice was issued

Preeti Bhalotia, Kolkata vs. ACIT-DCIT, Circle-44, Kolkata

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

ITA 362/KOL/2024[Assessment Year 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 144

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

Preeti Bhalotia, Kolkata vs. ACIT-DCIT, Circle-44, Kolkata

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

ITA 361/KOL/2024[Assessment Year 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 144

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

Preeti Bhalotia, Kolkata vs. ACIT-DCIT, Circle-44, Kolkata

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

ITA 360/KOL/2024[Assessment Year 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 144

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

Preeti Bhalotia, Kolkata vs. ACIT-DCIT, Circle-44, Kolkata

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

ITA 359/KOL/2024[Assessment Year 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 144

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

M/S. Exhibits India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2481/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2481/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S Exhibits India Pvt. Ltd. .……………………………………..….……….Appellant P-496, Keyatala Road, Kolkata – 700029. [Pan: Aabce1359C] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Jyoti Dugar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 26, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 09.09.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 6 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & The Delay Was Not Intentional. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. The Assessee In The Instant Appeal Has Raised Various Grounds But The Primary Issue Under Consideration Is That An Addition Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 40A(3) Of The Act Alleging The Violation Of Provision Of Cash Payment & Whether The Assessment Made U/S 153A R.W.S.

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 40A(3)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy

Dilip Kumar Mondal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 34(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1326/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1326/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Dilip Kumar Mondal,…………….…..…………Appellant 16, Rabindra Sarani, Lal Bazar, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aflpm1834N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-34(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri L.N Dash, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 148

assessment year 2012-13 was selected for reassessment under section 148 of the Act on 16.09.2019 and thereafter notices were issued under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act dated 18.11.2019 to the assessee through electronic mode. The point of contention of the ld. Assessing Officer

Tridip Das, Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 46(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 1309/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1309/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Tridip Das,………………………………………..…Appellant Manikara, Vill. Manikara, P.O. Manikara, P.S. Amta, Howrah-711416, West Bengal [Pan:Ancpd0972H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-46(4), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Income Tax Act, 1961 with the issues viz. “whether income from liquor business has been correctly offered for tax”. Subsequently, notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and duly served on the assessee. In compliance to the notices, it was found that the assessee derives income during

Tropex Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1231/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 1231/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Tropex Suppliers Private Limited,…………Appellant 113, Netaji Subhash Road, 5Th Floor, Room No. 93, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabct1459N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

income of Rs.45,184/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS with the reason large share premium received. Accordingly, notice under section 143(2) was issued and served on the assessee-company. Later notice under section 142(1) was also issued to the assessee. In response

Sunita Garg, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 43(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1382/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 1382/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Sunita Garg,……………………….…..…………Appellant 36A, Sahitya Parishad Street, Kolkata-700006 [Pan:Adspg1683J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-43(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca & Shri Saurabh Gupta, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit, D.R. & Smt. Ranu Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: February 26, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 68

post. In response to the same, the assessee filed return on 06.06.2018 showing total income of Rs.5,15,370/-. Thereafter notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued but the assesese did not respond to the above notices. Thereafter a questionnaire was issued to the assessee

M/S. Shreedhan Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2688/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 2688/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Shreedhan Mercantile Private Limited,.Appellant 70, Nalini Seth Road, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaqcs0723B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-1(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Rs.3,880/-. The assessee has mainly shown investments in unquoted equity shares. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Accordingly, notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and duly served on the assessee within stipulated time limit. In response to the said notices

M/S. Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Ltu, Chennai

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

ITA 2488/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2488/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Manali Petrochemicals Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 88 Spic House, Mount Road, Income Tax, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. Corporate Circle -1, Ltu, Chennai. [Pan:Aaacm3404D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P.V. Sudakar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.05.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 57 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 P.V. Sudakar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

trading of petrochemical products. The assessee filed return of income declaring total income of ₹.42,42,23,100/-. Under scrutiny, notices under section 143(2) of the Act and section 142(1) of the Act were issued. In the scrutiny proceedings, the assessee was asked to show-cause why provisions

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mulliambal Rathnasamy Pitchakannu Eraavanan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1810/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/2024 [In Ita No. 1810/Chny/2024] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Arvind E & Mrs. Baskaravalli Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), (Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mrp Investigation Building, Eraavanan), No. 4, Rice Mill Road, Chennai. Erimedu, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045. [Pan:Aaape5554D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Dr Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit Drew Our Attention To Additional Grounds Raised By The Appellant – Revenue. He Submits That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate
Section 159Section 2

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने