← 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)

Kakad House Co Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 25(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds of

ITA 1188/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Kakad House Co. Op Housing Society Ito, Ward – 25(1)(1), Mumbai Ltd. Vs Kautilya Bhawan, Bandra, Kakad House, Vithaldas Thakersey Mumbai Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400020. [Pan: Aadak4956B] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 254(1)Section 80ASection 80P

made by CPC by taking view that return of income was filed belatedly. The adjustment made by CPC was beyond the scope of section 143(1). The ld. AR of the assessee submits that once the CPC has no authority to make such adjustment therefore, adjustment/addition is liable ... taken by Division Bench of Rajkot Tribunal in Medi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd. vs ADIT (CPC) (supra). I further find that amendment to section 143(1)(a)(v) enabling disallowance of deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A was made by Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 01.04.2021 and thus, assessee

Kn Support Services Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5774/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkn Support Services Pvt.Ltd., Dcit, 30Th Floor, M3M International Circle 1(1), Financial Centre, Tower-1, Vs. Gurgaon, Golf Course Extensions Road, Haryana Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0720B (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

paid at concessional tax rate of 22% under section 115BAA of the Act. The return was processed vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 26.06.2023 wherein a normal tax rate of 30% was applied by CPC to the total income of the assessee as against the concessional ... tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act.) dated 26 June 2023 in erroneous and bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances

Kworks Technologies Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5773/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkworks Technologies Private Dcit, Limited, 30Th Floor, M3M Circle 1(1), International Financial Centre, Vs. Gurgaon, Tower-1, Golf Course Extensions Haryana Road, Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0865H (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

paid at concessional tax rate of 22% under section 115BAA of the Act. The return was processed vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 26.06.2023 wherein a normal tax rate of 30% was applied by CPC to the total income of the assessee as against the concessional ... Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal: 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act.) dated 26 June 2023 in erroneous and bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances

Jabalpur Entertainment Complexes Private Limited, Jabalpur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru & DCIT, Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 184/JAB/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Apoorva Rajesh Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

Patna, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 04.10.2024, dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the intimation under section 143(1), issued by the DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru, wherein the assessee was denied the benefit of taxation under section 115BAA of the Income ... return of income for the A.Y. 2023-24 on 26.10.2023 declaring total income of Rs.3,46,60,130/-. The same was processed under section 143(1) on 27.05.2024 at the same returned income, but the refund of Rs.57,080/- was denied and instead a demand of Rs.33

Attak Machinery Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Circle-1, Kanpur

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

ITA 134/LKW/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 250

return of income, the assessee had furnished its form 10 IC vide acknowledgment no. 274346891250221 dated 25.02.2021. A return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax, in which this claim for taxation under the alternative tax regime of section 115BAA was denied to the assessee. The assessee ... since the issue was a prima facie error, the ld. AO had made a mistake in refusing to rectify the intimation under section 143(1)(a) and therefore, it was submitted that relief may kindly be allowed to the assessee in this regard. The ld. CIT(A) observed that perusal

Anant Bajaj Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1995/MUM/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Anant Bajaj Trust Deputy Director Of Income Tax, 2Nd Floor, Bajaj Bhavan, Bengaluru Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai – 400021 (Pan: Aagta3192B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate & Shri M. A. Gohel, Ca Revenue : Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate and Shri M. A. Gohel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

being heard and the same is in gross violation of principle of natural justice and also not in accordance with the provisions of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Hence, the said adjustments may kindly be struck down/set aside. 1.3 It is submitted that the issue involved ... 143(1)(a)/143(1) of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer has resorted to the adjustments without complying with the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. The Appellant prays that the adjustment made is illegal, unwarranted and contrary to the law and may therefore be kindly struck

Lal Chand, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4479/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 4479/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Lal Chand, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca R.S. Poonia, Ward-1(4), D-83-B, Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Gurugram, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur-302015 Haryana-122016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agkpl7795F Assessee By: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.08.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

individual. He filed his return for AY 2018-19 on 29.08.2018 declaring income of Rs. 6,35,470/-. His return was processed under section 143(1)(a) on 28.06.2019. His case was selected for complete scrutiny assessment under the e-assessment Scheme, 2019 on two issues, namely refund claim ... income from other sources and claimed deduction for 50% as per section 57(iv) of the 1961 Act. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. An application under section 264 was made claiming that by mistake the assessee treated the interest income as income from other

Gangarani Balika Vidhyalya, Kannauj vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4007/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshgangarani Balika Vidhyalya, Vs. Ito, Rampur, Baiju, Chibramau, Ghaziabad Kannauj, Up Pan: Aatg8579N Assessee By : Shri Vibhu Gupta, Adv Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 260A

trust. The relevant assessment year is 1990-91 and the corresponding accounting year ended on March 31, 1990. The assessment was completed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" in short), raising a demand of Rs. 4,60,433. The assessee-trust sold certain ... under construction. Later, the assessee filed a petition under section 154 of the Act stating that the assessment could not be made under section 143(1)(a), because the prima facie adjustments made by the Assessing Officer were beyond his scope. However, the application was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same

Kailash Narayan Shridhar, Vadodara vs. Deputy CIT Circle 4(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 979/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Krutarth Desai, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 89(1)

Assessment Year 2022-23. The impugned order arises from the intimation issued by the Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru ("CPC") under section 143(1) dated 06.03.2023. ITA No. 979/Ahd/2024 Kailash Narayan Shridhar vs. DCIT Asst. Year -2022-23 -2- Facts of the Case 2. The relevant facts of the case ... statutory corporation, the limit of Rs.3,00,000 was not applicable. 3. The return so filed was processed by the CPC, Bengaluru, under section 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 06.03.2023. In the said intimation, CPC restricted the assessee's claim of exemption under section 10(10AA

Electronica Finance Limited, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pmt Building, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1112/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1111 & 1112/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2022-23 & 2023-24 Electronica Finance Limited, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. Audumber, 101/1, Dr. Ketkar Road, Pune City, Deccan, Gymkhana, S.O., Pune- 411004. Pan : Aaace4577B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Surat [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2022-23 & 2023-24 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1111/Pun/2025 For Assessment Year 2022-23 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80J

1. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred both in law and in facts in upholding the disallowance made in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) in respect of the deduction of Rs.49,40,441/- claimed under Section ... accepted by the appellant on January 9. 2023, well before the return was processed on March 16, 2023, under Section 143(1). Hence, as the said Form 10DA was available on record, there was no reason to deny the deduction claimed u/s. 80JJAA. 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) failed

Electronica Finance Limited, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pmt Building, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1111/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1111 & 1112/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2022-23 & 2023-24 Electronica Finance Limited, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. Audumber, 101/1, Dr. Ketkar Road, Pune City, Deccan, Gymkhana, S.O., Pune- 411004. Pan : Aaace4577B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Surat [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2022-23 & 2023-24 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1111/Pun/2025 For Assessment Year 2022-23 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80J

1. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred both in law and in facts in upholding the disallowance made in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) in respect of the deduction of Rs.49,40,441/- claimed under Section ... accepted by the appellant on January 9. 2023, well before the return was processed on March 16, 2023, under Section 143(1). Hence, as the said Form 10DA was available on record, there was no reason to deny the deduction claimed u/s. 80JJAA. 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) failed

Jaya Hind Mechanics Limited, Pune vs. Addl/JCIT(A)3, Bengalure

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

ITA 621/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pawan JainFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 154(4)Section 156Section 245Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Fis Solutions (India) Gratuity Trust, Pune vs. DCIT Circle 3(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 542/PUN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(25)(iv)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234B

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Gauri Ananya Marriage Beneficiary Trust, Kanpur vs. DCIT Circle-1(1)(1), Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 388/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Gauri Ananya Marriage V. The Dcit Beneficiary Trust Circle 1(1)(1) 133/185, M Block Kanpur Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aactg6467D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Saurabh Dubey, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Order Dated 10.10.2023, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Beneficiary Trust Created Vide Trust Deed Dated 04.01.2016 For The Benefit Of Two Minor Daughters Of Shri Sharad Kumar Agarwal, Namely Kumari Gauri & Kumari Ananya. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 15.07.2017, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.4,86,279/-. As Per Computation Of Income Of The Assessee- Trust, The Tax Payable Was Rs.24,337/-. However, While Processing The Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), The

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Dubey, D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 164Section 43(1)

Computation of Income of the assessee- trust, the tax payable was Rs.24,337/-. However, while processing the return of income under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), the ITA No.388/LKW/2023 Page 2 of 7 Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore charged tax at maximum ... which was dismissed by the CPC, vide its order dated 24.07.2018 and determined the total income as determined in the order passed under section 143(1) of the Act. 3.0 Aggrieved by the order dated 24.07.2018 passed by the CPC under section 154 of the Act, the assessee preferred

Shivanand Madas, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

ITA 483/HYD/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, Aluru V Sai SudhaFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 50Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD

Tapas Kumar Ghosh, Murshidabad vs. ITO, Ward-56(3), Murshidabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2602/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Him. The Facts Regarding This Issue Are Recorded On Page 3 Of The Impugned Order & It Is Clearly Mentioned That The Assessee Has Not Filed Any Reason Why The Delay Should Be Condoned & The Appeal Be Admitted For Adjudication.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A

Greenzen Bio Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1101/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 80ASection 80ISection 80J

taxpayer's income-tax return was processed by the Central Processing Centre (Bengaluru) (CPC) and the CPC passed an intimation under section 143(1) of the ITA, wherein amongst others, the deduction under section 80-IA and sec 80JJAA of ITA was denied to the taxpayer for non-submission ... upholding disallowance under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') made by the Learned ADIT-CPC in the order under section 143(1) of the Act. 1(b) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred

Maris Spinners Limited., Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result the substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue

ITA 945/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyassessment Year :2022-23

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80I

section 80IAC of the Act of Rs.70,25,927/-. Assessee uploaded form 10CCB which was filed on 02.11.2022. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 16.03.2023 denying the clam of the assessee observing that Form 10CCB was not filed as per the provisions ... Rs.70,25,927/- under section 80IA of the Act and Form 10CCB was filed on 02.11.2022. The return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 16.03.2023 but the claim of deduction as claimed by the assessee has been denied and learned CIT(A) has also upheld

Goldman Sachs (India) Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Income-Tax Department, New Delhi

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

ITA 6766/MUM/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 253Section 32Section 37(1)

further erred in treating the expense incurred towards RSU as notional loss in nature. 3. Ground No. 3: Addition made in intimation under section 143(1) of the Act of INR 2,88,48,661 The learned AO erred in facts and in law in considering income as per intimation ... under section 143(1)(a) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the disallowance made by the CPC in the intimation is resultant of mistakes apparent from record in the intimation. For the captioned AY, GSIFPL had made payment towards following expenses covered under section

Rajesh Kumar Garg, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-49(1), Delhi

ITA 971/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

deposited after the due date specified in the PF and ESIC Act while processing the Income Tax Returns ('ITR') of the assessee under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 4. The relevant facts giving rise to these appeals are that the assessee filed his ITRs ... relevant years within the time specified under Section 139(1) of the Act. While processing the said ITRs under Section 143(1) of the Act, the AO made disallowances/additions of employees' contributions to PF and ESI deposited after the due date specified in the PF and ESIC Act. Aggrieved