BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

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.

44 results for “disallowance”+ Section 2(38)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,955Delhi5,209Chennai1,745Bangalore1,717Kolkata1,311Ahmedabad1,303Jaipur963Pune878Hyderabad848Chandigarh510Indore503Surat397Raipur291Visakhapatnam237Cochin236Nagpur212Cuttack200Amritsar193Rajkot190Karnataka149Lucknow127Agra120Jodhpur106Allahabad88Ranchi74Guwahati61Calcutta55SC50Panaji44Telangana44Patna39Dehradun34Varanasi33Jabalpur23Kerala16Rajasthan3Orissa2Punjab & Haryana2Uttarakhand1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)46Disallowance41Section 80I39Section 14A36Deduction30Section 80P(4)29Section 8029Section 80P28Addition to Income25Section 40

PRIME MINERAL EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH FOMENTO RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED),PANAJI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 3/PAN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 003/Pan/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Prime Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Now Amalgamated With Fomento Resources Pvt. Ltd.) 102, 1St Fl. Kamat Metropolis-1, Behind Caculo Mall, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa-403001. . . . . . . .Appellant Pan : Aadcp1647E V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . Respondent Range-1, Panaji, Goa

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M. Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

22
Section 201(1)19
TDS11
Section 41(1)
Section 4I

section 14A of the Act vis- à-vis determination of such amount of disallowance u/c (iii) of rule 8D(2) of IT Rules. In view thereof, we do find any merit in the contention of the appellant and flaw in the action of tax authorities in invoking the former provisions for disallowance of expenditure. As a result, the contentions

M/S SHREE BALAJI CONCEPTS,MARGAO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TXATION), WARD -1, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated as above

ITA 73/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 73/Pan/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri M. R. Hegde, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 191Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 205

38[***] 39]***] salary) to a nonresident considers that the whole of such sum would not be income chargeable in the case of the recipient, he may make an application to the 4£[.Assessing] Officer to determine, n[by general or special order], the appropriate proportion of such sum so chargeable, and upon such determination, tax shall be deducted under

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO-DA-GAMA, GOA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI, GOA

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 38/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2013-14 Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Post Box No. 11, Suvarna Bandekar Bldg., Swatantra Path, Vasco-Da-Gama Goa-403802 Pan: Aaacb5502B . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 12/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-

For Appellant: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 37(1)

2(11) to cover both tangible and intangible assets for depreciation. ITAT-Panaji Page 37 of 39 M/s Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT ITA No. 038/PAN/2025 AY: 2013-14 37. Section 32 of the Act on the other hand, allows a deduction for depreciation on tangible (buildings, furniture & fixture and Plant & machinery) as well as on intangible assets (know

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 105/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

2)(iii) 5 ITA.No.105 & 116/PAN./2018 Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd., Margao, Goa. and not on the basis of the average of total value of investments appeared in the audited balance sheet of the appellant. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) legally erred in confirming the disallowance made by the AO in the sum of Rs.1

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 116/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

2)(iii) 5 ITA.No.105 & 116/PAN./2018 Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd., Margao, Goa. and not on the basis of the average of total value of investments appeared in the audited balance sheet of the appellant. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) legally erred in confirming the disallowance made by the AO in the sum of Rs.1

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 450/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Ahiliabai Sardessai Assistant Commissioner Of 301, Lotus Court, M. G. Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Vs. Road, St. Inwz Junction, Panaji. Panaji, Goa-403001. (Pan: Aagfa9044G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1 Vide Ita No. Cit(A), Pnj-1/10391/2017-18 Dated 14.09.2018 For A.Y. 2015-16 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit, Circle-1(1), Panaji, Goa Dated 13.12.2017. 2. Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A of the Act. 4. Brief facts as culled out from records are that assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of iron ore mining, cargo handling and investments. Return of income was filed at Rs. Nil on 2 M/s. Ahiliabai Sardessari, A.Y: 2015-16 30.09.2015 with a carried forward loss of Rs.7

M/S R. S. SHETYE & BROS,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), PANAJI

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

ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

2(11) to cover both tangible and intangible assets for depreciation. 37. Section 32 of the Act on the other hand, allows a deduction for depreciation on tangible (buildings, furniture & fixture and Plant & machinery) as well as on intangible assets (know-how, patents, copyrights, licenses, franchises) owned and used for business or professional purposes. 38. In the present case

THE SESA GOA EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,SANKHLIM GOA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), PANAJI., PANAJI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 45/PAN/2019[2015/16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri R L BhobeFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest on deposits with M/ s. Goa State Co-operative Bank Limited. 8. I have critically and carefully analysed the provisions of the IT Act as well as the citations relied upon by the AO as well as by the AR of the appellant. The provisions of section

HEGDEKATTA GROUP GRAMAGALA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD.,SIRSI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, SIRSI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 210/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

THE YAMAKANMARDI LAXMI URBEN CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT .,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (WARD) 1(1), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 222/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

M/S NERALI URBAN CO-OPRATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,NERALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2), BELAGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 446/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

THE BELGAUM MANUFACTURERS CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 431/PAN/2018[2015-16 ]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

SHRI. GOMATESH CO-OPP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, NIPANI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 249/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI BANK,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 443/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

SHRI SHIVAYOGI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 244/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

SHRI. GOMATESH CO-OPP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, NIPANI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 248/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

M/S VEERASHAIVA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI LIMITED,ATHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(2), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

ITA 445/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay are condoned

M/S. KINECO (P) LTD.,BARDEZ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4), PANAJI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 340/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Kineco (P) Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 60, Pilerne Industrial 2(4), Panaji. Vs. Estate, Pilerne, Bardez Goa- 403511. (Pan: Aabcm8681P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Vide Ita No. 418/Cit(A)-2/Pnj/2017-18 Dated 01.06.2018 For A.Y. 2013-14 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Ito, Ward-2(4), Panaji Dated 22.03.2016. 2. Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in directing the Assessing officer to examine the claim of the appellant company that no portion of interest on borrowed funds could be disallowed u/s 14A of LT. Act read with Rule 8D(ii) since it had not utilised borrowed funds for the purpose

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1), PANAJI., PANAJI vs. M/S ALCON RESORT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., PANAJI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2013-2014

ITA 327/PAN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S Alcon Resort Holdings Tax, Circle – 1(1), Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Alcon Chambers, Edc Complex, Patto Plaza, Vs. D.B. Road, Panaji, Panaji Goa Pan: Aabca6880E (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Y.V. Raviraj (Dr) Assessee By : Shri M.C. Naniwadekar (Advocate) Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2019

For Appellant: Shri M.C. Naniwadekar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Y.V. Raviraj (DR)
Section 115JSection 143Section 14ASection 43B

2,81,03,292/-, which consisted of business loss of Rs. 1,16,41,586/- and long term capital loss of Rs. 1,64,61,706/-. The assessment order was passed u/s 143 (3) of the Act after making disallowance of unpaid statutory liability u/s 43B amounting to Rs. 71,297/- and disallowance u/s 14A amounting to Rs. 38

DAMODAR MANGALJI & COMPANY LIMITED,PANAJI vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 34/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 034 & 035/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2014-15 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Damodar Niwas, 1St Floor, Mc Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan : Aaacd6880G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Jt./Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1/Circle-1(1), Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr M Satish [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/12/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Twin Appeals Of Assessee Instituted U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Are Directed Against Separate Din & Order 1070138041(1) Dt. 08/11/2024 & 1070321994(1) Dt. 13/11/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’] Which Sprang From Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Anent To Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 37(1)Section 40(1)(i)

38,465/- and (4) addition of ₹36,73,895/- being difference in closing inventory due to incorrect valuation which remain unexplained satisfactorily to the Ld. AO. ITA No 035/PAN/2025, AY : 2014-15; 5. Similarly for AY 2014-15 the assessee filed its return of income online on 29/11/2014 declaring ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 32 Damodar Mangalji & Company