← All Phrases

“Section 133(6)”

Section References (mined)Section 133Section 133(6)6,687 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 133(6) is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), cited in 1,465 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 133(6)

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
159 ITR 78 · 1986 · Supreme Court
897
citing judgments

When an assessee provides the identity and address of a creditor or investor for a cash credit or share capital under Section 68, the burden shifts to the Department to establish lack of genuineness or creditworthiness, requiring it to conduct further inquiries; mere non-compliance by third parties to summons cannot be the sole basis for an adverse inference against the assessee.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.
216 CTR 195 · 2008 · Supreme Court
854
citing judgments

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
349 ITR 98 · 2012 · High Court
818
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 10A, if communication or telecommunication expenses are excluded from export turnover, they must also be excluded from total turnover to maintain consistency and apply the ordinary meaning of 'turnover' in context.

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.
355 ITR 290 · 2013 · High Court
712
citing judgments

If an assessee makes purchases from bogus parties, but the underlying goods are genuinely acquired and sold, only the profit margin embedded in such purchases, and not the entire value of the bogus purchases, should be added to the assessee's income.

(Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.
103 Taxmann.com 48 · 2019 · Supreme Court
696
citing judgments

When assessing cash credits, share capital, or loans, the assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. This burden is not discharged merely by documentary evidence if field inquiries reveal accommodation entries or dealings with paper/shell companies.

CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull
87 ITR 349 · 1973 · Supreme Court
525
citing judgments

The onus to prove that an apparent transaction or explanation is not real lies with the person who claims it to be so. If an assessee provides a plausible explanation for a transaction, the revenue must establish that the apparent transaction is not genuine.

Judgments citing Section 133(6)

Dineshbhai Manibhai Patel, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Anand

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 997/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Garg, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL

Dhananjay Tradelink Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 842/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N Divetia, with Shri Samir Vora, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata vs. Eskag Sanjeevani Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1638/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

lenders, which are filed in the paper book from pages no. 11 to 718. We also note that the AO issued notices under section 133(6) of the Act to twelve parties which could only be served to six parties and remaining six cases, the notices were returned back unserved ... furnished the details such as copy of ledger account, bank statements, income tax returns, balance sheet etc. It was also recorded thatnotice under section 133(6) of the Act was issued to the said parties which were duly responded by them. The identity of the parties could not be, therefore

Dinesh Papoo Melwani, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1219/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri K.R Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 68

Jewellers had expired on 15 March 2016. It was contended that the Assessing Officer could have verified the matter by issuing notice under section 133(6) of the Act. It was further argued that the liability was never written off in the books of accounts, and hence provisions of section

Mohd Gulzar, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 63(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 4097/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI

Syed Mohammad Ali Zaidi, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(5), Meerut

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

ITA 1048/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansyed Mohammad Ali Zaidi, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2)(5), 218, Al Murtaza Zaidi Nagar Society, Meerut. Meerut – 250 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aafpz1420J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Mathur, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date Of Order : 08.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)) For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, A Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Was Issued On The Assessee Through Speed Post After Obtaining Approval From Ld. Pr. Cit, Meerut. Since There Was No Response From The Assessee, Notices U/S 142(1) Along With Questionnaire Were Issued To The Assessee. Since There Was No Compliance

For Appellant: Shri Amit Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI

ITO Ward - 1(2)(4), Meerut vs. Livros Publishing Pvt Ltd, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1971/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Livros Publishing Pvt. Ward-1(2)(4). Ltd., 37, Chippi Tank, Meerut (U.P) Meerut Pan: Aabcl7313B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, Adv. & Shri AnkitFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

cheque to assessee company M/s. Livros Publishing Pvt. Ltd. there are credit entries of matching amount in the bank. Vide letter issued under Section 133(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 25.11.2014 information was called for from the investment company M/s. Apoorva Leasing Finance and Investment Company Limited regarding

ACIT, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi vs. Nitin Garg, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4921/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

assessee in his books of accounts and vide letter dated 30.11.2017 the information was sought directly from these parties by the AO under Section 133(6) of the Act. The AO noted that in response to this, the information was received from the parties from where it was observed that

ACIT, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi vs. Nitin Garg, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4920/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

assessee in his books of accounts and vide letter dated 30.11.2017 the information was sought directly from these parties by the AO under Section 133(6) of the Act. The AO noted that in response to this, the information was received from the parties from where it was observed that

Shri Gurdev Singh, Ferozepur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(5), Jalandhar

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

ITA 48/ASR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 48/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Dinesh Prasad, Gaya vs. ITO, Wrd- 3 (1), Gaya

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

ITA 352/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 144Section 145Section 250Section 68

appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide order dated 31.05.2025 dismissed the appeal as the Assessing Officer had issued notices under section 133(6) to correlate the genuineness of the transactions and even during the appeal proceeding, the assessee failed to explain the detailed reason for not submitting

Subhash Badriprasad Shahu, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(3), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 421/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesubhash Badriprasad Shahu, Plot No.84, Near Annapurna Dall Mill, Bagad Ganj, Small Factory Area ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 008. Maharashtra. Pan – Agqps9660N V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(3), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

also filed an affidavit of the Vendor/ supplier of goods and the transporter has filed a response in lieu of notice under section 133(6) of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer at page 6 to 14 of the paper book. The contentions of the Ld.AR are realistic

Malwa Oxygen and Industrial Gases Private Limited, Sector C, Industrial Area vs. AO-Ratlam/Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Ratlam/Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 713/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI

Amber Enterprises India Limited, Rajpura, Punjab vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala, Punjab

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 554/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT, DR (Virtual)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 35Section 35(1)(i)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

DCIT, CC-I, Chandigarh vs. M/S Manohar Infrastructure & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

Appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1306/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1285/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1286/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Manohar Infrastructure & Dcit Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Vs. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Chandigarh. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1306/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S Manohar Infrastructure & बनाम/ Central Circle-1 Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Chandigarh. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Vs. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sarabjeet Singh (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

Appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1286/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1285/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1286/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Manohar Infrastructure & Dcit Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Vs. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Chandigarh. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1306/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S Manohar Infrastructure & बनाम/ Central Circle-1 Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Chandigarh. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Vs. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sarabjeet Singh (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

Appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1285/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1285/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1286/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Manohar Infrastructure & Dcit Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Vs. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Chandigarh. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1306/Chandi/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S Manohar Infrastructure & बनाम/ Central Circle-1 Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Chandigarh. Sco No 139-141 Sector 17-C Vs. Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-8616-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sarabjeet Singh (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Ry Midas Metacast Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.435/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2021-22 Ry Midas Metacast Private The Ito बनाम/ Limited Ward-3(1)(2) V/S. A-21,Zaveri Industrial Estate Ahmedabad – 380 015 Kathwada Road Kathwada Ahmedabad – 382 415 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecr 5807 M (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 40

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “ए“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

Sweety Devi, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1506/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Adv
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Amit Realtors Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Bokaro

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

ITA 243/RAN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.243/Ran/2023 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Amit Realtors Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle-3, Bokaro 20/1,Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue 1St Floor, Kolkata-700019 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aafca 8143 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Patna-3, Dated 31.10.2023, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Adjournment Application For All The Years Under Consideration As Follows :- To The Hon’Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Db-Bench, Ranchi Date:04.10.2025 Respected Sir, Sub: Appeal In The Case Of Amit Realtors Pvt. Ltd.-Ita No.243/Ran/2023: Assessment Year 2012-13 The Above Appeal Has Been Fixed For Hearing On 06.10.2025. In This Connection It Is Submitted That The Ld. Senior Counsel Shri S.M.Surana Is Out Of Kolkata & Shall Return On 06.10.2025. It Is Therefore Requested Your Honour To Kindly Allow A Short Adjournment & Oblige. For This Act Of Kindness The Petitioner As In Duty Bound Shall Every Pray. Yours Faithfully, (Abhishek Bansal, Fca) 3. It Must Be Mentioned Here That Said Mr. S.M.Surana Is Not A Senior Advocate Nor There Is Any Vakalatnama Has Been Filed In The Present Appeal. Thus, The Adjournment Application Of The Assessee Is Rejected. 4. The Ld. Cit-Dr Also Sought Adjournment In These Cases On The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None
Section 133(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, र ाँची न्य यपीठ, र ाँची IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI