← 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 Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT (Cen.)-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 355/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

facts of the case are that the assessee’s return was processed by the CPC and order under section 143(1) was passed wherein the disallowance invoking the provisions of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) was made for fault of the assessee not to pay the employees’ contribution to PF/ESI ... from the clarification brought in by the amendment to the provisions which apply retrospectively. It was accordingly held that the disallowance made under section 143(1) by the CPC on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employees’ contribution of PF / ESI within the prescribed due date

Akshay Devendra Birari, Nashik vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Nashik

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

ITA 782/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.782/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2023-24 Akshay Devendra Birari, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, 103/2, Shriheramb, Bengaluru Mitranagar, Baglan, Satana, Nashik 423 301 Maharashtra Pan : Bpfpb7648N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Deogadkar
Section 115BSection 143(1)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. ASTHA

New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income Tax Officer(1)- Circle 2, Punepune, Pune

ITA 246/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 0245 & 0246/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 & 2022-23 New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd. Level-1, Wing-A, Tower-06, Cybercity, Magarpatta, Pune-411013. Pan : Aaccn5091R . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer-1, Circle-2, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Twin Appeals Are Instituted U/S 253(1)(Aa) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging The Respective First Appellate Orders Dt. 19/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appels [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2022-23 [‘Ay’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 145(2)Section 250Section 253(1)(aa)Section 28

No.245 & 246/PUN/2024 12. The appellant assertion that, the impugned addition by way of prima-facie adjustment in terms of section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act is impermissible in law finds negated by the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court rendered in ‘Khatau Junkar Ltd. Vs DCIT ... find no infirmity with the orders of tax authorities below in bringing to tax GST refund through prima-facie adjustment u/c (iv) of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. The grounds representing first contentions accordingly stands dismissed as meritless. 13. The appellant’s third contention alleging the violation

New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income Tax Officer(1)- Circle 2, Pune

ITA 245/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 0245 & 0246/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 & 2022-23 New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd. Level-1, Wing-A, Tower-06, Cybercity, Magarpatta, Pune-411013. Pan : Aaccn5091R . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer-1, Circle-2, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Twin Appeals Are Instituted U/S 253(1)(Aa) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging The Respective First Appellate Orders Dt. 19/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appels [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2022-23 [‘Ay’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 145(2)Section 250Section 253(1)(aa)Section 28

No.245 & 246/PUN/2024 12. The appellant assertion that, the impugned addition by way of prima-facie adjustment in terms of section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act is impermissible in law finds negated by the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court rendered in ‘Khatau Junkar Ltd. Vs DCIT ... find no infirmity with the orders of tax authorities below in bringing to tax GST refund through prima-facie adjustment u/c (iv) of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. The grounds representing first contentions accordingly stands dismissed as meritless. 13. The appellant’s third contention alleging the violation

Laly Chirakandathil George, Kochi vs. The ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 73/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Laly Chirakandathil George The Acit Corp. Circle 1(2) Kattarukudiyil, Rmv Road, Kochi Vs. Elamakara, Kochi-26

For Appellant: Shri Mathew JosephFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 74(1)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Laly

Shri Rangasamy Sekar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle-17(1), Chennai

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

ITA 379/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.379/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Rangasamy Sekar, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 76, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 083. Non Corporate Circle 17(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aakps4106P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K.R. Sudersan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sudersan, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)(a)

received in respect of land acquired by the Government under REFCTLAAR Act. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and intimation was passed without allowing any exemption. When the assessee has realized that the compensation

Shri Mahudi Madhupuri Jain Nsm Bhojanshala & Prashadi Bhavan, Mahudi vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Exemption, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 184/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT- DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 12A(1)(ba)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

rightly disallowed the exemption claimed and made addition of the same to the total income of the appellant as per the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(ii). Accordingly, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the Assessing Officer. These grounds of appeal are hereby dismissed ... section 11 shall inter-alia file its return of income within the time allowed under section 139 of the Act. Accordingly, orders under section 143(1)(a) in those cases in which demand has been raised on this issue may please be rectified.” (Emphasis supplied) 12. It is, thus, clear

Indapur Taluka Prathmik Shikshakanchi Sahakari Patasnatha Maryadit, Pune vs. Income Taxofficer, Ward 14(5), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 348/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

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

S432 Kudimenahalli Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society, Deverahalli vs. Asst.Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

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

ITA 195/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(a)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य

Abhitech Energycon Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle 1 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 3120/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249Section 250Section 80I

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], which in turn arose from the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, for the assessment years 2015–16 and 2016–17. Abhitech Energycon Ltd. ITA no.3119/Mum./2023, ITA no.3120/Mum./2023 2. Since both ... 80IC of the Act without appreciating the fact that the said adjustment or variation made is not permissible as per the provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance made is unlawful, illegal, and ” therefore deserves to be deleted. 5. The NFAC erred in passing

Abhitech Energycon Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle - 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 3119/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249Section 250Section 80I

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], which in turn arose from the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, for the assessment years 2015–16 and 2016–17. Abhitech Energycon Ltd. ITA no.3119/Mum./2023, ITA no.3120/Mum./2023 2. Since both ... 80IC of the Act without appreciating the fact that the said adjustment or variation made is not permissible as per the provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance made is unlawful, illegal, and ” therefore deserves to be deleted. 5. The NFAC erred in passing

Shivananda Patil, Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 30 To 32/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 To 2022-23 Shivananda Patil Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Beipp9978P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21 To 2022-23. 2. As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Common Issue Involved In These Appeals That Arises For Our Adjudication Is In Respect Of Denial Of Relief Claimed U/S 90 Of The Act On Account Of Delay In Furnishing Of Form 67 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

Shivananda Pati, Jalpaiguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 31/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 30 To 32/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 To 2022-23 Shivananda Patil Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Beipp9978P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21 To 2022-23. 2. As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Common Issue Involved In These Appeals That Arises For Our Adjudication Is In Respect Of Denial Of Relief Claimed U/S 90 Of The Act On Account Of Delay In Furnishing Of Form 67 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

Shivananda Patil, Jalpaiguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 30/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 30 To 32/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 To 2022-23 Shivananda Patil Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Beipp9978P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21 To 2022-23. 2. As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Common Issue Involved In These Appeals That Arises For Our Adjudication Is In Respect Of Denial Of Relief Claimed U/S 90 Of The Act On Account Of Delay In Furnishing Of Form 67 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

Taruna Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 7(2), Jpr, Jaipur

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

ITA 111/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: M/S Suhani Maharwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary, Addl.CIT
Section 115Section 115BSection 139Section 143(1)Section 3Section 80C

08/01/2024 [here in after ‘ld. CIT(A)’ ] for assessment year 2022-23 which in turn arise from the order dated 23.02.2023 passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, by ADIT, CPC Bengaluru. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - 2 Taruna Maheshwari

Telecrats India Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 819/JPR/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 15JSection 36(1)(va)Section 80J

National Faceless Appeal Center/ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Id. AO in making the adjustment in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which are outside the purview of Section 143(1)(a). The action of the Id. AO is illegal ... depositing the employees' contribution to PF/ESI as prescribed u/s 36(1)9va) of the Act, disallowance thereof is beyond the scope of section 143(1) and the that it is arbitrary and against facts of the case. The issue is now squarely covered by the decision

Vpssr Facilities, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-49(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3711/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Cit(A) When Discussed The Same By Applying The Judgment Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit-1, In Civil Appeal No.2833 Of 2016 & Ors.

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 37(1)

held that disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) on the basis of Tax Audit Report in Form 3CD is a permissible adjustment under Section 143(1)(a)(iv) as well as under section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. It is further held that the insertion of the words, "increase ... income" in section 143(1)(a)(iv) w.e.f. 01.04.2021 will have no impact on such disallowance. 7.43. The disallowance made u/s.36(1(va) vide intimation u/s. 143(1) stand confirmed in the following cases, to mention a few: (i) Pravin Malshi Shah Vs Circle-23(1) (ITAT Mumbai

Samsung C and T Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle 22(2) Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2184/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

Auditor has shown the expenditure under clause 21(a), which is specified for capital and personal expenditure. After receiving the intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act making such adjustment, the assessee moved an application under section 154 of the Act seeking rectification, however, the application so filed ... Officer, since, mistake can be rectified only if it is apparent from the existing record at the time of processing of return under section 143(1) of the Act. With the aforesaid observations, the first appellate authority sustained the disallowance. 6. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted

Ss Industries, Lucknow vs. CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1/LKW/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 May 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa.Ys. 2022-23 S.S. Industries, Vs. Cpc, G 4/49 Transport Nagar, Bangalore Lucknow. Pan Adqfs 6630P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Ys. 2022-23 S.S

The Adarsha Bharathi Farmers Service Cooperative Society Limited, Kanekal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Kurnool

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

ITA 579/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Dundu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80P

that prior to 01/04/2021, no such power was conferred upon the learned Assessing Officer to disallow such claim and that the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act brought within its purview the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act for the purpose of making