Search: disallowance | 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.

335 results for “disallowance”+ Section 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,488 Delhi2,150 Bangalore813 Chennai533 Kolkata512 Ahmedabad440 Pune335 Jaipur320 Cochin267 Indore259 Hyderabad226 Chandigarh204 Surat130 Visakhapatnam114 Raipur112 Nagpur101 Lucknow98 Agra80 Amritsar67 Guwahati62 Jodhpur54 Rajkot51 Cuttack43 Karnataka42 Calcutta42 Allahabad28 Patna26 Telangana21 Panaji20 Jabalpur18 SC15 Kerala9 Ranchi9 Dehradun8 Punjab & Haryana7 Varanasi5 Rajasthan2 Gauhati1 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 154113 Section 143(1)83 Section 143(3)65 Addition to Income61 Section 14A46 Disallowance46 Section 12A40 Deduction40 Section 143(1)(a)36 Section 11

KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2392/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 80J

Showing 1–20 of 335 · Page 1 of 17

...

35

Rectification u/s 15432

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that Form 10CCB was not filed within the due date. The assessee being aggrieved by the said intimation order, filed an application for rectification u/s 154

KOTHARI AGRITECH PVT. LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2455/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 80J

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that Form 10CCB was not filed within the due date. The assessee being aggrieved by the said intimation order, filed an application for rectification u/s 154

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2286/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 154

section 154 for making such disallowance. Apart from challenging disallowance on ground of jurisdiction, the assessee assailed disallowance on merits

BEED TALUKA DHUD VASAYIK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD,,BEED vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, BEED

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1025/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gudekar

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(c)

disallowed the claim of deduction of Rs.50,74,224/- u/s 80P(2)(b) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO passed u/s 154 of the Act, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.15.03.2017 (in appeal No.ABD/CIT(A)- 2/76/2016-17) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee

M/S. SHIVAMM INDUSTRIES,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

ITA 393/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.393/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Shivamm Industries, The Dy.Commissioner Of Plot 76, Arihant Heights, Sector Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, No.25, Pradhikaran Nigdi, Pune. Pune – 411044. Pan: Aaefs 0458 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee I.E. Shivamm Industries For A.Y. 2013-14 Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Of Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Dated 21.03.2023 Emanating From Assessing Officer’S Order Under Section 154 Of The Act Dated 22.03.2021. The Ground Of Appeal Are As Under : “1. The Order Dated 21/03/2023 Bearing No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051048828[L] Passed Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 By The Hon’Ble Cit[Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Is Excessive, M/S.Shivamm Industries [A]

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36

disallowance from the expenditure of staff welfare petrol sale promotion. Subsequently, the AO issued a notice under section 154 of the Act. The relevant

KPIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 594/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.594/Pn/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Kpit Technologies Limited, (Earlier Known As Kpit Cummins Infosystems Ltd.) Plot No.35/36, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Phase I, Midc, Hinjewadi Phase 1 Rd, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aaack7308N Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle -14, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A(2) of the Act before making aforesaid disallowance. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee in this regard, placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2017) 81 taxmann.com 111 (SC) and in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) 91 taxmann.com 154

TATA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 168/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.168 & 1708/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules were clearly attracted and made disallowance of ₹ 1,95,01,231/-. Since the assessee had already disallowed sum of ₹ 39,32,077/-, the Assessing Officer made balance disallowance at ₹ 1,55,69,154

TATA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1708/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.168 & 1708/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules were clearly attracted and made disallowance of ₹ 1,95,01,231/-. Since the assessee had already disallowed sum of ₹ 39,32,077/-, the Assessing Officer made balance disallowance at ₹ 1,55,69,154

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD., (FORMERLY IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,),PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

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

ITA 74/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.74/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd., (In The Matter Of Erstwhile Igate Computer Systems Ltd. Formerly Known As Patni Computer Systems Ltd. & Since Amalgamated With Igate Global Solutions Ltd. & Now Name Changed To Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd.) Plot No.14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase-Iii, Midc-Sez, Village Man, Taluka Mulshi, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057 …. Pan:Aabcp6219N Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 11, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.299/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri C.H. Naniwadekar

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 143(3)Section 234C

section 154 of the Act. Consequently, the said grounds of appeal are dismissed as not pressed. 15. Now, coming to balance grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, wherein vide ground of appeal No.2 the Revenue is aggrieved by deletion of disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. IGATE COMPUTER SYSTEM LTD.,, PUNE

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

ITA 299/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.74/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd., (In The Matter Of Erstwhile Igate Computer Systems Ltd. Formerly Known As Patni Computer Systems Ltd. & Since Amalgamated With Igate Global Solutions Ltd. & Now Name Changed To Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd.) Plot No.14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase-Iii, Midc-Sez, Village Man, Taluka Mulshi, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057 …. Pan:Aabcp6219N Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 11, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.299/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri C.H. Naniwadekar

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 143(3)Section 234C

section 154 of the Act. Consequently, the said grounds of appeal are dismissed as not pressed. 15. Now, coming to balance grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, wherein vide ground of appeal No.2 the Revenue is aggrieved by deletion of disallowance

MCM DEVELOPERS,AURANGABAD vs. DCIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 362/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 154Section 269SSection 270ASection 271DSection 40A(3)

section 154 is bad in law and deserves to be struck down. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of natural justice.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, that the assessee

MAJALGAON SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,,BEED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 1523/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1523/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Modi

section 154 disallowing assessee’s claim of set off of unabsorbed depreciation to the extent of Rs.12,70,39,171/-. The ld. Authorized

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1120/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

disallowance of Rs.2,75,50,640/-. So far as the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC holding that the issue is a debatable one and therefore the proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is not justified is concerned, he submitted that as per provisions of section

IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1792/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

disallowance of Rs.2,75,50,640/-. So far as the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC holding that the issue is a debatable one and therefore the proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is not justified is concerned, he submitted that as per provisions of section

M/S. SHARADA PAPER COMPANY,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (4),, PUNE

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

ITA 1547/PUN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1547/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S.Sharada Paper Company, The Income Tax Officer, 436/8, Narayan Peth, Vs Ward-11(4), Pune. Maharashtra – 411030. Pan: Aaffs 1470 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-8, Pune For The Assessment Year 2007-08 Dated 18.07.2019 Arising Out Of Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.03.2013. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Withdrawal Of Claim For The Carry Forward Of Loss For A.Y. 2003-04, A.Y. 2004-05, A.Y.2005-06 & A.Y.2006- 07 Without Verifying The Facts. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Rectification Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 154 & Thereby Withdrawing Loss Allowed In The Assessment Made Under Section 143(3) Of Income Taxact,1961 Without Appreciating The Fact That This Is Not Mistake Apparent From Records & Hence Cannot Be Rectified Under 154 Of The Act.

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 44A

disallowance can be made u/s154 in AY 2007-08 ? 5.6 The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Sirsa Industries v/s CIT 147 ITR 238 has observed as under : Quote, “ There is no dispute with the proposition that the ITO can take recourse to the proceedings under section 154

PRAMOD TARADE,RAIGAD vs. CIT ( NFAC ), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 898/PUN/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.898/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Pramod Tarade, The Commissioner Of A-2, Sai Ameya Chs, Plot V Income Tax,[Nfac]. No.28, Sector-12, Kharghar, S Panvel, Raigad – 410210. Maharashtra. Pan: Aevpt9870L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Tarun G – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2021-22 Passed On 24.06.2023 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.12.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : “1. The Order Of The Cit(A) Nfac, Dt. 24-06-2023 For The A.Y. 2021 -22 Is Contrary To Law & Facts & In The Circumstances Of Pramod Tarade [A]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.12.2022. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : “1. The Order of the CIT(A) NFAC, dt. 24-06-2023 for the A.Y. 2021 -22 is contrary to law and facts and in the circumstances of Pramod Tarade [A] the case. 2. The CIT(A) NFAC

PRABHAT GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATNSANSTHA MARYADIT TADWADI,RAIGAD vs. ITO, WARD 3, PANVEL

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

ITA 1433/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Akash KumarFor Respondent: Shri Vishal Makawane

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 44ASection 44BSection 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

section 80P of the Act due to oversight by the Accountant of the assessee trust while filing the income tax return. In order to correct its mistake, the assessee filed rectification application u/s 154 which was rejected by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) vide order dated 25.04.2024 observing that the disallowance

DEVEN SUPERCRITICALS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 176/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.176/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 14A(2)

disallowance without recording satisfaction in line with provisions of section 14A(2) of the Act. 4. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the issue in the present appeal is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 380/PUN/2020[2016/17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 14A

154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]” 5.5 If the provisions of law contained under section 14A and diction of section 14A is perused, it is clear that section 14A codifies the well accepted principle of taxation that if an income is not taxable, no expenditure in relation to such income

BRIG. (RETD.) JITENDRA KUMAR NARANG,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD 11(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 228/PUN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp Malik (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act at Rs.5,64,290/-. 3. After considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under :- “5.4 The A.O., by virtue of order u/s 154 of the Act, has made addition of Rs.5,30,000/- stating that in the assessment