← All Phrases

“Section 37(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 37Section 37(1)4,308 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 37(1) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 37(1)

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,596
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,569
citing judgments

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

Judgments citing Section 37(1)

Eris Lifesciences Limited, Ahmedabad vs. NFAC, Dehi (Present Jurisdiction- the Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1)), Ahmedabad

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 912/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

Guwahati Unit and a corresponding reduction in 80-IE deduction. The AO then examined channel partner/retail promotion expenses and conference related expenses under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO held that documentary evidence furnished by the assessee was inadequate to substantiate that the entire expenditure pertained exclusively ... appeal before CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised grounds challenging the 14A disallowance, the allocation of employee benefit expenses, the disallowances under section 37(1), the PF disallowance, the rejection of additional claims regarding MAT computation, and the computation of 80-IE deduction and MAT credit. 4. In the appellate order

DCIT Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs. Eris Lifesciences Limited Shivarth Ambit, Bodakdev Ahmedabad

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 850/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

Guwahati Unit and a corresponding reduction in 80-IE deduction. The AO then examined channel partner/retail promotion expenses and conference related expenses under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO held that documentary evidence furnished by the assessee was inadequate to substantiate that the entire expenditure pertained exclusively ... appeal before CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised grounds challenging the 14A disallowance, the allocation of employee benefit expenses, the disallowances under section 37(1), the PF disallowance, the rejection of additional claims regarding MAT computation, and the computation of 80-IE deduction and MAT credit. 4. In the appellate order

Dcie Circle-2(1)(1), Ahemdabad, Vejalpur vs. Eris Lifesciences Limited Shivarth Ambit, Bodakdev Ahmedabad

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 849/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

Guwahati Unit and a corresponding reduction in 80-IE deduction. The AO then examined channel partner/retail promotion expenses and conference related expenses under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO held that documentary evidence furnished by the assessee was inadequate to substantiate that the entire expenditure pertained exclusively ... appeal before CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised grounds challenging the 14A disallowance, the allocation of employee benefit expenses, the disallowances under section 37(1), the PF disallowance, the rejection of additional claims regarding MAT computation, and the computation of 80-IE deduction and MAT credit. 4. In the appellate order

DCIT Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Eris Lifesciences Limited Shivarth Ambit, Bodakdev Ahmedabad

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 848/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

Guwahati Unit and a corresponding reduction in 80-IE deduction. The AO then examined channel partner/retail promotion expenses and conference related expenses under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO held that documentary evidence furnished by the assessee was inadequate to substantiate that the entire expenditure pertained exclusively ... appeal before CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised grounds challenging the 14A disallowance, the allocation of employee benefit expenses, the disallowances under section 37(1), the PF disallowance, the rejection of additional claims regarding MAT computation, and the computation of 80-IE deduction and MAT credit. 4. In the appellate order

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Eris Lifescience Limited Shivarth Ambit, Ahmedabad

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

Guwahati Unit and a corresponding reduction in 80-IE deduction. The AO then examined channel partner/retail promotion expenses and conference related expenses under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO held that documentary evidence furnished by the assessee was inadequate to substantiate that the entire expenditure pertained exclusively ... appeal before CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised grounds challenging the 14A disallowance, the allocation of employee benefit expenses, the disallowances under section 37(1), the PF disallowance, the rejection of additional claims regarding MAT computation, and the computation of 80-IE deduction and MAT credit. 4. In the appellate order

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune vs. Honeywell Automation India Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Shri Manish M. Mehta
Section 135Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(1)(ii)Section 80G(2)(a)Section 80G(5)(vi)

added back in the computation of income under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” in accordance with Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. (iii). As the donee institution was approved u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, the appellant claimed 50% deduction ... 1)(ii) read with Section 80G(2)(a)(iv) of the Act on the said donation. (iv). Section 37(1) of the Act imposes no restriction on claiming deduction u/s 80G of the Act on CSR expenses as long as the conditions stipulated in Section

Elcome Technologies Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6188/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr.-DR
Section 250Section 250(4)Section 37Section 41(1)

become irrecoverable and in view of the matter the loss was to assessee's business and was required to be allowed under Section 37(1) of the Act. 28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court analysed Section 36(1)(vii) and Section 37 of the Income Tax Act. It was observed

M/S Tdk India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT Circle 11(1), Kolkata, Delhi and Kolkata

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

ITA 2565/KOL/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Tdk India Private Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata Wbidc Growth Centre, Kulia Aayakar Bhawan, P-7 Kanchrapara Road, Po Ns Chowringhee Square, Sanatorium,Kalyani, Nadia, Vs. 6Th Floor, Roomno.18, Kolkata-741251, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci6950Q Assessee By : Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

income, the appellant had duly disallowed the entire amount of CSR expenses of INR 80,25,360 in accordance with Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Act (Refer Page 1452 of paper book for copy of computation of total income of the Company). 5.3. The ld. AR submitted ... compliance with Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 has been duly disallowed in computing business income, in accordance with Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act. Out of INR 80,25,360 INR 53,50,000 represented donations made to charitable institutions registered under Section

Royal Chains Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 3(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4260/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69ASection 80

accordingly, applied from assessment year 2015-16 and subsequent years. Thus, CSR expenditure is to be disallowed by new Explanation 2 to section 37(1), while computing Income under the Head Income form Business and Profession’. Further, clarification regarding impact of Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Income ... Explanatory Memorandum to The Finance (No.2) Bill, 2014 is as under: "The existing provisions of section 37(1) of the Act provide that deduction for any expenditure, which is not mentioned specifically in section 30 to section 36 of the Act, shall be allowed if the same is incurred wholly

DCIT(TDS)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Novartis Healthcare Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2768/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Dcit(Tds)-2(3) Novartis Healthcare Private 320, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill, Limited Mtnl Te Bldg. Peddar Road Vs. 7Th Floor, Inspire Bkc, G Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg Block, Bkc Main Road Mumbai-400 026. Bandra, Mumbai-400 051. Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 121/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year : 2020-21)

For Respondent: S/Shri Anish Thacker (CA)
Section 133ASection 192Section 194Section 194HSection 201

appellant company because no person can be treated as “assessee in default” under section 201 where there is a voluntary disallowance under section 37(1) of the Act. In other words, when the appellant company itself disallowed the expenditure voluntarily, section 194A and consequent interest under section 201(1A) cannot

Starkey Laboratories India Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT Circle-24(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3205/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalstarkey Laboratories Dy. Cit, India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-24(2), C-2, Sector-7, Vs. New Delhi. Gautam Buddha Nagar-201301, Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aakcs6072R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(1)(b)Section 37(1)Section 92C

disallowance of Rs.1,09,96,986/- of the Provision for expenses for Discount, Marketing and Advertisement expenses claimed by the appellant under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The order of the CIT(A) is not sustainable in law in as-much-as the order ... financial year. The provisions have been made in accordance with the mercantile system of accounting and are thus allowable as business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act. 1961, being incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. 1.3. Out of the total provision made

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru vs. Flipkart India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1395/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37

force would be no ground to deny the claim of the assessee for deduction, which otherwise satisfies all the conditions referred to in section 37(1) of the Act. The decision of the ITA Nos.1394 & 1395/Bang/2025 Page 24 of 26 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sassoon ... price at which it is issued and the market value of the shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of section 37(1) of the Act." ITA Nos.1394 & 1395/Bang/2025 Page 25 of 26 10. The assessee's case being identical, respectfully following the above decision of the coordinate

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru vs. Flipkart India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1394/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37

force would be no ground to deny the claim of the assessee for deduction, which otherwise satisfies all the conditions referred to in section 37(1) of the Act. The decision of the ITA Nos.1394 & 1395/Bang/2025 Page 24 of 26 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sassoon ... price at which it is issued and the market value of the shares would also be expenditure incurred for the purposes of section 37(1) of the Act." ITA Nos.1394 & 1395/Bang/2025 Page 25 of 26 10. The assessee's case being identical, respectfully following the above decision of the coordinate

ACIT, Circle - 3 3 1, Mumbai vs. Jamnagar Utilities and Power Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 5312/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Nimesh Vora/For Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 135Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 43ASection 80G

profit and loss account towards Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenditure. In accordance with the specific bar contained in Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Act, the assessee suo-motu disallowed this amount while computing its business income. However, as these payments were made to institutions duly registered under ... have considered the rival submissions and examined the material on record. The core issue is whether CSR expenditure, though disallowed under section 37(1), can nevertheless qualify for deduction under section 80G, provided other statutory conditions are fulfilled. Section 37(1), read with Explanation 2, merely prohibits allowance

ACIT, Circle - 3 3 1, Mumbai vs. Jamnagar Utilities and Power Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 5310/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Respondent: Mr. Nimesh Vora/
Section 115JSection 135Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 43ASection 80G

profit and loss account towards Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenditure. In accordance with the specific bar contained in Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act, the assessee suo-motu disallowed this amount while computing its business income. However, as these payments were made to institutions duly registered under ... have considered the rival submissions and examined the material on record. The core issue is whether CSR expenditure, though disallowed under Section 37(1), can nevertheless qualify for deduction under Section 80G, provided other statutory conditions are fulfilled. Section 37(1), read with Explanation 2, merely prohibits allowance

Trent Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5602/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari &For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra
Section 135(5)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 37Section 37(1)Section 80G

failed to appreciate that the provisions relating to disallowance of CSR expenditure have been introduced only in connection with allowability of deduction under section 37(1) of the Act, and do not apply to allowability of deduction under section 80G of the Act.” 3. The relevant facts in brief

M/S.Balluram Steels Pvt. Limited, Rourkela vs. Principal CIT, Central Circle, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.291/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) M/S Balluram Steels Pvt. Ltd, Vs Pr.Cit, Central Circle, 1St Floor, Purohit Market Complex Visakhapatnam Main Road, Rourkela-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 7253 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Visakhapatnam, Dated 28.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That In The Course Of Assessment U/S.147 Of The Act, The Ao Had Disbelieved The Transaction Of The Purchase Of Iron Ore & Had Invoked The Provisions Of Section 37(1) Of The Act & Had Made The Disallowance Of Purchases. It Was The Submission That The Ld. Pr.Cit Has Invoked His Powers U/S.263 Of The Act & Had Directed That The Provisions Of Sectiion 37(1) Of The Act Is Not To Be Applied But The Provisions Of Section 69C Of The Act Are To Be Applied. It Was The Submission That The Issue Is Now Squarely Covered By The Decision Of The Coordinate Bench Of The Tribunal In The Case Of Bajrang Steel & Alloys Private Limited, Passed

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 37(1)Section 69C

assessment u/s.147 of the Act, the AO had disbelieved the transaction of the purchase of iron ore and had invoked the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Act and had made the disallowance of purchases. It was the submission that the ld. Pr.CIT has invoked his powers u/s.263 ... clearly shows that the expenses in respect of purchases of raw materials have been disallowed by the AO by invoking the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Act. This is because the assessee was not able to prove the transactions with M/s Jai Ambey Enterprises. A perusal

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1906/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT -Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1905/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1904/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR