Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

30 results for “TDS”+ Section 273clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi290 Mumbai253 Patna150 Bangalore115 Karnataka107 Chennai104 Kolkata64 Ahmedabad42 Raipur40 Chandigarh30 Indore28 Jaipur26 Cochin23 Hyderabad22 Lucknow20 Pune13 Cuttack13 Nagpur12 Visakhapatnam11 Rajkot7 Kerala5 Panaji5 SC4 Allahabad4 Agra4 Guwahati4 Varanasi4 Amritsar3 Surat2 Jodhpur2 Orissa1 Rajasthan1 Telangana1 Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)30 Section 13(3)24 Section 234E16 Addition to Income16 TDS13 Section 200A10 Deduction8 Disallowance8 Exemption8 Limitation/Time-bar

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

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

ITA 1463/CHANDI/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 May 2018AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. GuleriaFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

Section 142Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

TDS return is demonstrated by the assessee on the lines of section 273 B of the Act which so provides

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

8

Business Income6

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

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

ITA 1663/CHANDI/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 May 2018AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. GuleriaFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

Section 142Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

TDS return is demonstrated by the assessee on the lines of section 273 B of the Act which so provides

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 321/CHANDI/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 320/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 345/CHANDI/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 319/CHANDI/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 325/CHANDI/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 323/CHANDI/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 322/CHANDI/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

SH. AJAY GOEL,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

TDS was deducted was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). 16.7 The Ld. DR in addition to placing reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), argued that in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the huge drop in the GP rate from earlier years, the assessee failed to give any plausible explanation. Further

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SATYAM AUTO COMPONENTS LTD., LUDHIANA

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

ITA 589/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate

TDS. It has again been submitted that the Assessing Officer has treated this expenditure as "long term benefit" for enhancement of manufacturing process & treated the expenses as of capital expenditure by adding the total amount of Rs. 19,04,914/- to the total income of the assessee company. It has again been submitted that the assessee company has incurred this

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SATYAM AUTO COMPONENTS LTD., LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1500/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate

TDS. It has again been submitted that the Assessing Officer has treated this expenditure as "long term benefit" for enhancement of manufacturing process & treated the expenses as of capital expenditure by adding the total amount of Rs. 19,04,914/- to the total income of the assessee company. It has again been submitted that the assessee company has incurred this

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO TDS-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 340/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act.\ 2.1) The learned AO had erred both on facts and in law in not taking cognizance of the certificate issued by the Income Tax department u/s 195(2) of the Income Tax Act in respect of the charges paid to international telecom companies on account of the charges incurred by the subscriber of the assessee

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 217/CHANDI/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act.\ 2.1) The learned AO had erred both on facts and in law in not taking cognizance of the certificate issued by the Income Tax department u/s 195(2) of the Income Tax Act in respect of the charges paid to international telecom companies on account of the charges incurred by the subscriber of the assessee

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 216/CHANDI/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act.\ 2.1) The learned AO had erred both on facts and in law in not taking cognizance of the certificate issued by the Income Tax department u/s 195(2) of the Income Tax Act in respect of the charges paid to international telecom companies on account of the charges incurred by the subscriber of the assessee

EXOTIC REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263

TDS. This is a relevant factor which must be taken into consideration as there is no change in facts and circumstances of business activities of the assessee or accounting policies and practices followed. 13.3 The Ld. AR then contended that the Ld. AO, after verifying the detailed explanation given by the assessee (supra), did not find any adverse thereon

SHRI MUNISH ARORA,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 158/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

section 153A(1) which was not claimed in his regular return of income, thus, impugned order of AO rejecting such claim of assessee was unjustified CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para

SHRI MUNISH ARORA,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 170/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

section 153A(1) which was not claimed in his regular return of income, thus, impugned order of AO rejecting such claim of assessee was unjustified CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para

SHRI MUNISH ARORA,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 171/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

section 153A(1) which was not claimed in his regular return of income, thus, impugned order of AO rejecting such claim of assessee was unjustified CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para

SHRI MUNISH ARORA,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 169/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

section 153A(1) which was not claimed in his regular return of income, thus, impugned order of AO rejecting such claim of assessee was unjustified CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT v Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270/374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para