MADHYA PRADESH COUNSALTANCY ORGANISATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 461/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S M.P. Consultancy Acit-2(1) बनाम/ Organization Ltd., Bhopal Vs. Block -2, 3Rd Floor Paryawas Bhawan, Arera Hills Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcm0090J Appellant By Shri M.K. Sharma, Ca Revenue By Smt. Vineeta Dube, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 .09.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Bhopal, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Dated 30.03.2017 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 23.-2.2016 By Acit- 2(1), Bhopal.
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 224Section 271(1)(c)Section 36Section 37Section 56
24)(x) r.w.s. 36(viia) as per
Rs.13,04,862/- para 3.6
Add: Income from Punjab National Bank not Rs.18,35,393/- offered to tax as per para 4.5
Assessed Total Income (Rounded off)
Rs.1,17,71,160/-
3. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed.
4. Now the assessee is in appeal
