“Section 143(1)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)2,323 judgments

JIVANBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,UNJHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, PATAN

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2196/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri P F Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Kumar Agarwal, Sr. D.R

right for claiming the refund. Jivanbhai Somabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2022-23 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the order under Section 143(1) dated 31.05.2023 and the order passed by the CIT(A). 8. I have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available

VIDYA SHANKER JAISWAL, SARGUJA,SARGUJA vs. ITO, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 142/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.141 & 142/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: S/shri Yash Dhariwal &For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

following the procedure like issue of notice under section 143(2)/142. This does not pro-vide accepting the return as provided under section 143(1)(a) : the officer has to complete the assessment under section 143(3) only. If an assessment is to be completed under section 143

VIDYA SHANKER JAISWAL, SARGUJA,SARGUJA vs. ITO, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 141/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.141 & 142/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: S/shri Yash Dhariwal &For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

DEEPANSHU SRIVASTAVA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 4064/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 144B

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI\n\nBEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

DEEPANSHU SRIVASTAVA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 4063/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI\n\nBEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AMAZON SMART COMMERCE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3533/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

{ "clean_text": "ITA No. 3533/Del/2025\n\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI\nBEFORE SHRI S

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 5560/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'): - a) 2,38,02,26,886/- on account of various additions/disallowances made in intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act dated 2 25.10.2022 which are also in contradiction to the directions of ld. DRP; b) 29,45,91,940/- on account

NAZIM RIAZUDDIN SAIYED,TURQUOISE NYATI EMPIRE KHARADI PUNE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 4(4), PMT BUILDING, SWARGATE, PUNE

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

ITA 287/PUN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.287/Pun/2026 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Nazim Riazuddin Saiyed, Vs. Assessing Officer, 301, Turquoise Nyati Empire, Ward-4(4), Pune Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Maharashtra Pan : Aqzps0676B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar

Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.287/PUN/2026

MOHAMMED USMAN, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RPR/2026[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.180/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohammed Usman C/25, Nandini Road, Power House, Bhilai-490 011, Dist. Durg Pan: Aafpu9292H

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

SHIV EXTRUSION,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

ITA No. 646/Rjt/2025 Shiv Extrusion vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL

TEHMINA K KATRAK CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

ITA 549/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Section 11Section 119Section 139Section 154Section 92E

return of income, specific query in this regard was\nraised upon the Assessee. The Assessee received intimation, dated\n01/07/2022, as per Proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act regarding\nproposed adjustments wherein it was stated as under:\n“The Trust or Institution registered under Section 12A/12AA/12AB has\nnot ... reasoning given is identical to the reasoning given for the\nproposed adjustment and the same reads as under:\n“Incorrect Claim under Section 143(1)(a)(ii)\nAmount in INR\nSI\nNo.\nSchedule\nError Description\nIn Income\nTax Return\nAs computed\nVariance\n1.\nPart B-TI/Part\nA-General\nInformation

THE BOMBAY HINDU BURNING AND BURIAL GROUNDS COMMITTEE,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXE WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 9324/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 254(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

LOGICS POWERAMR PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASST DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

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

ITA 6641/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 Logics Poweramr Private Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Limited Tax, 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha No. 7, Sarswati Bhawan 1/4 Lalita Park, Laxmi Nagar 48/1, 48/2, East Delhi Laxmi Nagar Beratenaagrahara Begur, Delhi-110092 Hosur Rd. Uttarahalli Hobli, Pan No.Aadcl3204D Bangalore-560100 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80I

vide order dated 04-09-2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2021-22 arising out the intimation order dated 11-11-2022 under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961, (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal: 1. That in the facts ... form 10CCB was not filed by the due date whereas the same was filed on 11-10-202 before processing of return under section 143(1)(a) on 11-11-2022. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the order passed by the learned Addl/JCIT-

ODISHA TELEVISION LIMITED,DELHI vs. CIRCLE 19(1), DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 6501/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

ADDL/JCIT\n(A)-1 Kolkata, [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)] dated 25.06.2025 arising\nout of assessment order dated 22.08.2025 passed under section 143(1) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The word ‘Act' herein\nthis order would mean Income ... seminal to the present appeal is regarding the\nnon-grant of any opportunity of being heard to the assessee before making\nadjustment under section 143(1) of the Act by the Revenue authorities. As per\nbrief factual matrix of the case an addition of Rs.62,53,200/- was made

RAI SAHAB BHAIYALAL DUBEY EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

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

ITA 186/JAB/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(1)

your honors kind consideration. 1. In the first ground of appeal the assessee is contesting the assessee society has received intimation under section 143(1) by CPC vide DIN no CPC/2021/A7/164799645 of dated 30/11/2021 and assessing the income of Rs 17,41,999/- of the assessee society and demand ... determined. 1.1 OURS SUMBISSION;- That the assessee society has received intimation under section 143(1) by CPC vide DIN no CPC/2021/A7/164769645 dated 30.11.2021 assessing the income of Rs. 17,41,999/ of the assessee trust and demand of Rs. 3,72,020/- was determined therein on account of disallowance

VERALA DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/PUN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.179/Pun/2026 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Verala Development Society, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 12 Kalanagar, Exemption Ward, Madhavnagar Road, Pb No.49, Kolhapur Sangli – 416 416 Maharashtra Pan : Aaatv1019N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.179/PUN/2026

SURESH NATVARLAL ZINZUWADIA,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 314/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Ms Rangoli Gada, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 112ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

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

SURENDRA HIMMATLAL SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT, 8(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 8536/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gopal Sharma &For Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat

Section 115Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal against the Intimation Order, dated 17/01/2025, passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] for the Assessment Year 2024-2025. 2. The Assessee has raised following ... appreciate the fact that the Appellant has not been provided with an opportunity of being head as mandated by first proviso to section 143(1) of the Act and hence the impugned order/intimation under section 143(1) of the Act is void ab initio and is liable to be quashed

ROTARY CLUB OF BOMBAY QUEENS NECKLACE CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 8306/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Prusethrotary Club Of Bombay Vs Ito (Exem.) Ward 2(2), Mumbai Queens Necklace Charitable Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road Trust Mumbai-400020 B 41/45, Paragon Centre, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaatr4200K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PatelFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat (SR DR)

Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Bombay Queens Necklace Charitable Trust order emanated from the order of the CPC Bengaluru (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 143(1) of the Act date of order 18.11.2024 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public trust registered under ... Appellant for the 3 Rotary Club of Bombay Queens Necklace Charitable Trust Assessment Year 2023-24 by issuing an Intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, vide Intimation dated 18.11.2024 and assessed the Appellant on Total Income of Rs. 31,40,538/- against Taxable Income

MARIGOLD MERIDIAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 9072/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(19)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Investment of such funds in Co-operative Banks does not affect eligibility for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d). 7. Erroneous Invocation of Section 143(1)(a)(ii) The Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the adjustment made u/s 143(1)(a)(ii) by CPC on the ground of "incorrect claim ... fact that eligibility of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) is a debatable and adjudicatory issue, which cannot be adjusted in an intimation under Section 143(1). 8. Failure to Consider Disclosures and Supporting Evidence The CIT(A) erred by failing to appreciate that the assessee had duly disclosed the interest

Showing 1–20 of 2,323 · Page 1 of 117

...