Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.263

Section 139(1) falls under section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 263 (Return of income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 263 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 139(1) is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 of the 8,117 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 139(1)

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. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 241 · 2016 · High Court
791
citing judgments

A penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing incorrect particulars of income.

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
263 ITR 706 · 2003 · Supreme Court
691
citing judgments

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court
609
citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

Judgments on Section 139(1)

Broach Technology India Private Limited, Aurangabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 722/PUN/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon. & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.Broach Technology India Pvt. Vs Dcit, Circle-1, Ltd., Plot Nos.K-219 & 220, Aurangabad. Midc, Waluj, Aurangabad. Pan: Aabcb 9287 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S.K. Vijayavergia, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/12/2023 Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 23.04.2023 For A.Y.2021-22 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Vijayavergia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

Mohan Lal Talesara, Udaipur vs. DCIT, CPC / ITO, Ward-1(1), Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 316/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur15 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.316/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154oSection 194JSection 250

M.R Prakash M. Adani, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeal)-50, Mumbai

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

ITA 922/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: (Retd.) Justice C.V. Bhadang () & Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 69

Sha Kalidas Pragji Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Exem. Ward 2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3032/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice C.V. Bhadang (Rtd.) () & Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

Section 11(2)Section 11(2)(c)Section 12ASection 139(1)

Bhupendrakumar Balvantlal Gandhi, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 687/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.687/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) Bhupendrakumar Balvantlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- Gandhi 1(3)(1), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 36 Jai Ambe Society, B/H Arjun Majura Gatre, Surat-395001 Complex, Bhatar Road, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agapg 3261 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 11/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/12/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short, “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 11.08.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’), Dated 18.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Reopening Assessment U/S 147 Of Ethe Act By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer By Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.13,79,000/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit.

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Cir-11(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1082/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1082/Kol/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd…………..........................……....Appellant 4B, Little Russel Street, Kolkata- 700071. [Pan: Aabcg0816E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Adv. On Behalf Of Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.08.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. C.I"T.(A) On 16.08.2023 Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T.(A) Was Wrong In Confirming The Disallowance Towards Employees Contribution Towards

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)

Nrusinh Saraswati Yog Chintan Math Trust, Thane vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Thane

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

ITA 2658/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2658/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Nrusinh Saraswati Yog बिधम/ Ito, Exemption Ward, Chintan Math Trust Thane Vs. 16, Narayan Niwas, Opp, Quereshi Mansion, Railway Station, Thane Gokhale Road, Naupada, East, Maharashtra-400603. Near Teen Hath Naka, Thane West-400602. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagts6735E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ramkrishna Lingsur Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 05.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Action Of The Ao Denying The Accumulation U/S 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) To The Tune Of Rs.10,50,000/- Despite The Fact That The Application For Condonation Of Delay In Filing Form 10 Was Pending Before Ld. Cit(E), Pune.

For Appellant: Shri Ramkrishna LingsurFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)

Shaarp Aluminum, Pune vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Pune

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 957/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.957/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/S Sharp Aluminium F-41, S.No. 28/29 Shrushti, Guruganesh Nagar, Kothrud Pune-411038. Pan: Aczfs2580G . . . . . . .अपऩलधर्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr MK Kulkarni & JR ChandekarFor Respondent: Mr MG Jasnani
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 253(1)(a)Section 43B

Mukkam Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward 2(3), Kozhikode

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the stay petition rendered infructuous

ITA 437/COCH/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Johnson George, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80ASection 80P

Mukkam Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward 2(3), Kozhikode

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed and SA dismissed

ITA 436/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Johnson George, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

M/S. G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg.) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 95/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.95/Kol/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) Pvt. Ltd…………..........................……....Appellant 4B, Little Russel Street, Kolkata- 700071. [Pan: Aabcg0816E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 30, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 08, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.01.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. Ci.T.(A) On 03.01.2023 Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T.(A) Was Wrong In Confirming The Disallowance Towards Employees Contribution Towards

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 37

M/S Supreme Treon Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Cenralized Processing Centre., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2219/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250Section 44ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

Fatehpuria Transformers and Witchgears Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar MathurFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 801A(5)Section 80I

Lord Venkateshwara Ladies Educational and Welfare Trust, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward-1, Bangalore

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

ITA 616/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Lord Venkateshwara Ladies Vs. Ito (Exemption), Educational & Welfare Trust, Ward –1, No.1696, Bengaluru. 5Th ‘A’ Cross, Banashankari 1St Stage, Bengaluru – 560 080. Pan : Aaatl 6403 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 250

Kesa Prasad Rao, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Vijayawada

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

ITA 240/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.240/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Kesa Prasada Rao, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vemulasarva Post, Ward-1(3), Krishna District, Vijayawada. Andhra Pradesh-521402. Pan: Cebpk 0634 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri Madhukar Aves, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

Gates Unitta India Company Private Limited, Kanchipuram vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

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

ITTPA 55/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleit (Tp) A No.55/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. M/S.Gates Unitta India Co. Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of- F-19, Sipcot Industrial Estate, Income Tax, Pondur A, Sriperumbudur, Corporate Circle-2(1), Kanchipuram-602 105. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcg 7107 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A. Sasi Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

M/S T vs. Srichakra Limited, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 36/CHNY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 36/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tvs Srichakra Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 7-B, Tvs Building, V. Income Tax, West Veli Street, Corporate Circle, Madurai – 625 001. Madurai. [Pan: Aaact-5557-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 801CSection 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80I

Sri. Manikandan Vazhukkapar Kumaran, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed

ITA 577/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Sri Seetaramanjanenya Sortex, Kakinada vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 147/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.147/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Income Tax Kakinada Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abdfs4641P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Paradeep Tayal & OrsFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(i)Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Udala Regional Cooperative Marketing Socity Limited, Mayurbhyanj vs. ITO, Ward-Bbn-W-(9)(91), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Nov 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 271F