← All Phrases

“Section 143(1)(a)”

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

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1)(a) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)(a)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

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. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

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 Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

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.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Judgments citing Section 143(1)(a)

M/S.Mukkam Mega Multipurpose Co-Op Soceity Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, Kozhikkode

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petition is dismissed

ITA 952/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Johnson George, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)

also important to examine whether the same can be done u/s.143(1)(a). In this regard we will look at the provisions of section 143(1)(a) which reads as under - 143. (1) Where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under ... applicable clauses for making the disallowance u/s.80P is either 143(1)(a)(ii) or 143(1)(a)(v). An amendment is brought into section 143(1)(1)(v) to provide that disallowance of deduction claimed under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.—Deductions

M/S Ambitious Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 123/RJT/2014[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Mar 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Mrs. Madhumita Royिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 1997-98 M/S. Ambitious Finance & Vs. Income Tax Officer, Investment Pvt. Ltd., Ward- 2(4), 107, Kapad Market, Para Bazar, Rajkot Rajkot Pan : Aabca 8076 C अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Written Submission Revenue By : Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 234BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MRS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. Shri Vimal Chand Surana(HUF), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 62/JPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 139Section 143Section 147Section 150(2)Section 153CSection 2Section 250Section 69

parties. The assessee HUF filed original return of income on 27.09.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 39,71,670/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 02.11.2009. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income ... achieved where an assessment order had already been passed in respect of all or any of those six assessment years, either under Section 143(1)(a) or Section 143(3) of the Act. If such an order is already in existence, having obviously been passed prior to the initiation

Shri Madho Lal Saini, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 238/JPR/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Shri S. Najmi (CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 54BSection 54FSection 69

achieved where an assessment order had already been passed in respect of all or any of those six assessment years, either under Section 143(1)(a) or Section 143(3) of the Act. If such an order is already in existence, having obviously been passed prior to the initiation

Merlin Land & Housing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward-16(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 8948/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Anan Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 14Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 71

allowable under that head, then it cannot be allowed even if it has been incurred by die assessee. 4.1.2 Relevant portion of section 143(1)(a) is reproduced as under: “(1) Where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1 ... return of income will constitute "an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return" as defined in the Explanation to section 143(1). It is settled law that adjustments to income or loss declared in the return can be made if, on the basis of tire information available

Shri Navavaghniya Seva Sahkari Mandali Limited, Amreli vs. The DCIT/ACIT (CPC), Bangalore, Banagalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 13/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80P

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “NFAC”), arising out of the Intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2019-20. I.T.A No. 13/Rjt/2022 ... materials available on record. It is apparent from the Ld. NFAC order when the assessee has clearly pointed out the amendment in Section 143(1) made by Finance Act, 2021 which is not applicable for the present assessment year 2019-2020. However the same was not been considered

Meeta Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-68(8), New Delhi

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

ITA 1793/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2019-20 Meeta Singh, Vs. Ito, C/O Jain & Malhotra, Ward-68(8), 117, Inderprakash Building, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. Pan: Axops3464K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.03.2023 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Authorities Below Have Erred In Invoking Section 50C Of The I.T Act Without Following The Proper Procedure Laid Down In The Act. The Action Of The Authorities Below Is Wrong, Illegal, Misconceived & Unjustified Therefore It Should Be Quashed. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Authorities Below Have Erred In Confirming The Addition On Account Of Deemed Capital Gain Amounting To Rs.9,50,000/-. The Action Of The Authorities Below Is Wrong, Illegal,' Misconceived & Unjustified Therefore It Should Be Quashed. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Authorities Below Have Erred In Enhancing The Interest U/S 234B & 234C Of The Income Tax Act. The Action Of The Authorities Below Is Wrong, Illegal, Misconceived & Unjustified Therefore It Should Be Quashed. The Appellant Craves The Right To Add, Submit, Alter Or Withdraw Any Or All Grounds Of Appeal Before Or On The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 50C

income was wrongly determined by making unilateral adjustment of controversial nature which did not fall within the ambit of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 4. Replying to the above, the ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 2 5. In the present case, as noted ... additions of Rs.29,52,674/- by way of adjustment and intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act, were beyond the scope of Section 143(1) of Income Tax Act; and further, that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the aforesaid addition on a debatable and controversial

Hi-Tech Water Solution Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (1)(1), Surat

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 434/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.434/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Hi-Tech Water Solution Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle – 1(1)(1), Vs. 229-230, Turning Point Complex, (Processed By Ghod Dod Road, Opp. Fire Dcit-Cpc-Bangalore) Station, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadch1709F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vinod Goyal, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2023

Section 115Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80I

NFAC’), dated 29.11.2022, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 13.06.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee ... follows: “1. The CIT(A)-NFAC-Delhi has erred in confirming the incorrect adjustment made under clause (v) of the section 143(1)(a) of the Act, in disallowing the deduction claimed u/s 80(I)(A) of Rs.1,52,16,470/- (restricted to the amount of Gross Total Income

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

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

ITA 385/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

17/10/2017 and Form 10B has been filed on 28/05/2021. The reason of disallowance was clearly mentioned in the communication of proposed adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, wherein the assessee has neither mentioned about filing application for condonation nor about condonation of delay obtained from jurisdictional Commissioner

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

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

ITA 384/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

17/10/2017 and Form 10B has been filed on 28/05/2021. The reason of disallowance was clearly mentioned in the communication of proposed adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, wherein the assessee has neither mentioned about filing application for condonation nor about condonation of delay obtained from jurisdictional Commissioner

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

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

ITA 383/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

17/10/2017 and Form 10B has been filed on 28/05/2021. The reason of disallowance was clearly mentioned in the communication of proposed adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, wherein the assessee has neither mentioned about filing application for condonation nor about condonation of delay obtained from jurisdictional Commissioner

Ocean Exim India Private Ltd, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 37/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prabha Rana (Adv.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre ("NFAC" for short) relating to the assessment year 2018-19. 2. THE INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(1) DATED 16.10.2019 IS AGAINST FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 143(1)(A), AND THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE 143(1) PROCEEDINGS IS INVALID IN LAW. a) Brief facts ... filed its return of income on 30-10-2018 declaring total income at Rs.7,60,410/-. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) and on 16.10.2019 by the Centralized Processing Centre and determined total income

Agarwal Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur vs. ITO 5(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 399/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A. S. Nehara (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)(a)Section 154

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh

Shri Arun Kumar Shrivastava, Indore vs. Asstt, Director of Income Tax, Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 99/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

account the latest decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), the legal provision of section 143(1) of the Act and various judicial rulings. The order of Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench is extracted below: “5. The assessee is in appeal ... issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section 143(1) of the Act. In response, DR relied upon the observations made by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 6. We have heard

Smt Cjjaya Balwani, Bhopal vs. The Cpo, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 330/IND/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

account the latest decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), the legal provision of section 143(1) of the Act and various judicial rulings. The order of Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench is extracted below: “5. The assessee is in appeal ... issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section 143(1) of the Act. In response, DR relied upon the observations made by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 6. We have heard

Shri Rohit Panchal, Indore vs. The DCIT-CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 203/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

account the latest decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), the legal provision of section 143(1) of the Act and various judicial rulings. The order of Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench is extracted below: “5. The assessee is in appeal ... issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section 143(1) of the Act. In response, DR relied upon the observations made by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 6. We have heard

Nimar Motors P Ltd, Khargone vs. DCIT/CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 118/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

account the latest decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), the legal provision of section 143(1) of the Act and various judicial rulings. The order of Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench is extracted below: “5. The assessee is in appeal ... issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section 143(1) of the Act. In response, DR relied upon the observations made by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 6. We have heard

G.S Developers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Range-10, Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 757/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargita Nos. 756 & 757/Del/2022 (Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2019-20) G. S. Developers & Vs. Acit Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Range -10 C-58, Community Centre, Delhi Sahapuri Tirath Singh Tower, New Delhi – 110058 Pan No. Aaacg 0870 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri D. K. Gupta, C.A Shri S. C. Malhotra, C.A Revenue By Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 04.04.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2019-20. 2. At The Outset, Learned Ar Submitted That The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical Except For The Year & Amounts Involved & Therefore The Submissions Made By Him For One Year

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

That the CIT(A) is not justified in holding that the appellant has not explained as to how intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, 1991 is against facts and law even though the submissions uploaded have been reproduced in Para 4.1 of the appellate order. There ... deposit of employee share of Provident Fund & ESI under section 36(1)(v) as it is not within the purview of the section 143(1) of the Act. It is a debatable issue which cannot be covered under the said section. Further no reasonable opportunity of representation has been accorded

G.S Developers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Range-10, Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 756/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargita Nos. 756 & 757/Del/2022 (Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2019-20) G. S. Developers & Vs. Acit Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Range -10 C-58, Community Centre, Delhi Sahapuri Tirath Singh Tower, New Delhi – 110058 Pan No. Aaacg 0870 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri D. K. Gupta, C.A Shri S. C. Malhotra, C.A Revenue By Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 04.04.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2019-20. 2. At The Outset, Learned Ar Submitted That The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical Except For The Year & Amounts Involved & Therefore The Submissions Made By Him For One Year

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

That the CIT(A) is not justified in holding that the appellant has not explained as to how intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, 1991 is against facts and law even though the submissions uploaded have been reproduced in Para 4.1 of the appellate order. There ... deposit of employee share of Provident Fund & ESI under section 36(1)(v) as it is not within the purview of the section 143(1) of the Act. It is a debatable issue which cannot be covered under the said section. Further no reasonable opportunity of representation has been accorded

Dahida Seva Sahakari Mandali Limited, Village: - Dahida, Dist.:- Amreli vs. The ADIT (CPC), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 277/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “NFAC”), as against the Intimations passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2019-20. 2. The solitary issue involved ... assessee. 3. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before CPC Centre claiming that there was no provision in section 143(1)(a) to make adjustment to the returned income by disallowing u/s. 80P, if the returned income is not filed within the due date specified