← 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)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Aijaz Investments & Estates Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 79/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2021 To 80/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Aijaz Investments Income Tax & Estates Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2190E] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad vs. Aijaz Investments & Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 78/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2021 To 80/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Aijaz Investments Income Tax & Estates Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2190E] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad vs. Shoeb Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.76/Hyd/2021 & 77/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Shoeb Estates Income Tax Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aancs8525Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 14.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 & 2016-17. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order. Shoeb Estates Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Soudamini Investments Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal ITA No

ITA 1453/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared. 2nd Appeal was e-filed

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH” KOLKATA SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mhatre Palace Chsl, Borivali West vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, Mumbai

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

ITA 6394/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Ito – 42(1)(3) Mhatre Palace Chsl Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc 106 Mhatre Palace Chs Ltd Bandra E – 400 051. Ic Colony, Link Road, Borivali (W), Mumbai 400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaaam9414D (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

limited scrutiny assessment on the issue of deduction from total income under Chapter VI-A of the Act, and statutory notices under section 143(2) as well as section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked

Rucha Promoters and Developers Private Limited, Pune vs. DCIT CC 6(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5024/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Dcit, Circle – 6(1) M/S Rucha Promoters & Room No. 445, 4Th Developers Pvt Ltd., Floor, Kautilya No. 103/104, 1St Floor, Bhavan, Bkc, Ramsukh House, Shivaji Mumbai – 400051. Nagar, Near Sancheti Hospital, Pune – 411005 Pan/Gir No. Aaecr2605P (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vs. DCIT, Circle

Chintan Shailesh Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-30(1)(2), Now ITO Ward-41(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed with no order as to cost

ITA 2469/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarchintan Shailesh Shah Vs. Ito, Ward 30(1)(2) Rushikesh, Shanti Nagar, (Now Ward 41(3)(1)) Adarsh Dugdhalaya Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Malad (W), Mumbai – Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400064. 400051. Pan/Gir No. Amzps2768Q (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

test of fair hearing has not been satisfied in their individual cases. In all the cases, the assessees have been issued notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act they have been directed to furnish the documents, the assessee have complied with the directions, appeared before

The Bhatia General Hospital, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 4666/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Viral ShahFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR

Ratnesh Kumar Jain, Shivpuri vs. Income Tax Officer Ashok Nagar, Gwalior

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

ITA 278/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144rSection 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRABENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Sarita Agrawal, Gwalior vs. ACIT, Gwalior

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

ITA 170/AGR/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarmrs. Sarita Agrawal Acit Geeta Colony Aayakar Bhawan Dal Bazar, Gwalior- V. City Centre 474001 Gwalior-474001 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk3445P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 153A

153A, the assessee filed return of income on 10.09.2013 ,declaring total income of Rs.1,33,032/- . Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) was issued by the AO to the assessee, which was claimed by the AO to have been duly served on the assessee. The assessee participated in the assessment

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Akola, Nagpur vs. Rbsd and Fn Das, Nagpur

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 36/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

determining total income ` 3,52,80,280. Later on, the case was re–opened pursuant to order under section 263 and notice under section 143(2)) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 06/02/2023 and duly served. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued ... Assessee filed return of income on 13.02.2022 declaring total income of Rs.18,01,81,210/-. Case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued which were duly replied by the assessee. In the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) the AO has made

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Makarand Madhusudan Joshi, Nagpur

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 382/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

assessee filed return of income on 01/02/2021 by declaring total income of ` 7,22,500. Subsequently, on 09/02/2021, notices under section 143(2) and under section 142(1) along with questionnaire were also issued to the assessee. the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed its replies from time to time which

Sanjay Gulabchand Gupta, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 210/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54F

return of income for AY 2017-18 on 30/10/2017 declaring total Income of ` Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") were issued. In response to various notices, assessee has duly complied the notices

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur vs. M/S. Fuelco Coal India Ltd., Nagpur

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 90/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40aSection 68

purpose book profit at ` 2,31,61,735. The return of income thus filed was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was served on 10/09/2015, on the assessee company. Scrutiny assessment under section 143

Venkateswara Rao Koganti, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 68/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

complete scrutiny under the E-assessment Scheme, 2019 to verify the issue of “Cash deposit during demonetization period”. Subsequently, statutory notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued from time to time. Assessee in response to these notices also made submissions from time to time

Mujmmeel, Kota vs. ACIT-Central Circle, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Miss. Swatika Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT a
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k

Vishwambhar Shankar Shinde, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle -2, Thane

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

ITA 6750/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Vishwambhar Shankar Shinde Dcit Central Circle Thane 6Th Floor, Room No. 13, A Wing, 105-106, Jadhav Market, Behind Canara Bank, Badlapur (W), Thane – Vs. Ashar It Park, Road No. 16-Z, 421503. Wagle Indl, Estate, Thane – 400604. Pan/Gir No. Awnps4932N (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Sunil Tiwari Respondent By : Shri. Prashant Barate, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune – 11 (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Ld. Cit(A)’S Order In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The First Appellate Authority. 3. Briefly Stated The Assessee Is An Individual & Proprietor Of M/S. Kiran Diagnostics Centers. The Assessee Had Filed His Return Of Income Dated 16.12.2020, Declaring Total Income At Rs. 71,97,910/-. Pursuant To The Survey Action Conducted In Assessee’S Case Vishwambhar Shankar Shinde

For Appellant: Shri. Sunil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri. Prashant Barate, SR. DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Finlinea Healthwits Privae Limited Q, Mumbai vs. De CIT Cirlce 6(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6709/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Prashant Barate, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Jitendra Shankerlal Brahmbhatt, Mumbai vs. Asstt Comm. of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

ITA 6705/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Rahul HakkaniFor Respondent: Shri. Manish Saresh (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Mangaldeep Superstructures Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, National E Assessment Centre

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

ITA 5797/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhrimangaldeep V/S. Ito, Superstructures Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Delhi-110001 45 Heeramani Ratanbangur Nagar Goregaon West, Maharashtra-400104 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaci771B Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Letter fileFor Respondent: Shri. R. R. Makwana
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER