Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(1) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 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 143(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 of the 12,311 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment 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).

CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.
367 ITR 466 · 2014 · Supreme Court
1,558
citing judgments

Taxing statutes are presumed to operate prospectively unless a clear contrary intention for retrospective application is evident. The law applicable for determining tax liability is that which stands on the first day of the assessment year, following the principle that law looks forward, not backward (lex prospicit non respicit).

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. Alom Extrusions Ltd.
319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court
1,344
citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.
198 ITR 297 · 1992 · Supreme Court
814
citing judgments

A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society
392 ITR 74 · 2017 · High Court
762
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from its investments or surplus deposits with a cooperative bank is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

Judgments on Section 143(1)

Anagha Kishor Chaudhari, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3200/MUM/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleanagha Kishor Chaudhari V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Room No. 245-A, North Block 1505, Sea Flama Dosti Flamingo New Delhi- 110001 T J Road, Sewree Mumbai- 400015 Pan: Aakpc6578K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Kishor P. Chaudhari Department Represented By : Shri Minal Kamble

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

Swastic Oil Industries, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 35/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Swastic Oil Industires, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Bajrang Pulses and Agro Products (P) Ltd, Jalna vs. Income Tax Office Ward-1, Jalna

ITA 221/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.221/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Bajrang Pulses & Agro Products (P) Ltd., Bajrang Dal Mill Compound, Sardar Patel Rd., Jalna–431203 Pan : Aaifb0690H . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Jalna . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Revenue By : Deepali Kalbandhe सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/04/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year [“Ay” In Short] 2020-21 Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Nfac” In Short] Dt. 26/12/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act” In Short] Which In Turn Originated Out Of Order Of Rectification Passed U/S 154 Of The Act Dt. 02/03/2022 By The Cpc, Bengaluru.

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Deepali Kalbandhe
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Sana Tondon Benefit Trust, Kolkata vs. I.T.O.(Exemption) - Ward-1(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 553/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.553/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sana Tondon Benefit Trust..........................................………...…..…Appellant 4, Copper Street, Richi Park, Kolkata-700020. [Pan: Aadas8436Q] Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ward-1(3), Kolkata..................................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order :May 01, 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 13.09.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Is A Benefit Trust Formed On 27.03.2009 & Registered By A Deed Executed On 15.06.2010. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income By Declaring Rs.1,01,590/- As Income. However, While Filing Of Return Of Income, The Assessee Mistakenly Filed Itr 7 Instead Of Itr 5. The

Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250

Sri. Krishnaswamy Venkata Raman, Bangalore vs. Asst. Director of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 106/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri R.E. Balasubramniyan, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vi)Section 37Section 43B

Dynasty Modular Furnitures Private Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 99/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Himanshu Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-6(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 253/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Shivangi Samdhani,CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(16)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154

Manu Kumar Shahi, Jamshedpur vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Jamshedpur

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

ITA 8/RAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.8/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manu Kumar Shahi…….…..…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant 94, East Plant Basti, Burmanines, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831007. [Pan: Barps6204E] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Jamshedpur.……………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nitin Pasari, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 01, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.12.2021 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’).

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 40

Radha Raman Tripathy, Bokaro vs. ITO, Bokaro

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 41/RAN/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.40&41/Ran/2020 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2013-14 Shri Radha Raman Tripathy.…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant Plot No. F-9, City Centre, Sector-Iv, Bokaro Steel City. [Pan: Abhpt2232Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(2), Bokaro….………………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri R. R. Tripathy, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 27.02.2020 & 19.02.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hazaribagh [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence, These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.40/Ran/2020 For Assessment Year 2002-03 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Income Tax Return On 19.03.2004 Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.1,56,420/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, It Came To The Of 1

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250

Radha Raman Tripathy, Bokaro vs. ITO, Bokaro

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 40/RAN/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Apr 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.40&41/Ran/2020 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2013-14 Shri Radha Raman Tripathy.…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant Plot No. F-9, City Centre, Sector-Iv, Bokaro Steel City. [Pan: Abhpt2232Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(2), Bokaro….………………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri R. R. Tripathy, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 27.02.2020 & 19.02.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hazaribagh [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence, These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.40/Ran/2020 For Assessment Year 2002-03 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Income Tax Return On 19.03.2004 Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.1,56,420/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, It Came To The Of 1

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250

Vijay Bag Singh Rajpurohit, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 591/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailvijay Bag Singh Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Rajpurohit Plot No. 4, Income Tax, Vikas Bunglow Behind Cpc Bengaluru Bahari Petrol Pump, 560100 Sion, Trombay Road Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Adqpr7848L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Vipul Shriyan Respondent By : Vranda U Matkari Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.12.2022 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Commissioner Of Income Appeals National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Ld Cit(A)) Erred In Upholding Disallowance Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1001 (The Act) By Cpc, Bengaluru Under Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act In Respect Of Employees Contribution Made To The Provided Fund & Other Funds Which Was Paid After The Due Date Prescribed Under The Respective Law But Before The End Of The Financial Year & Due Date Of Filling Return Of Income Is Covered U/S 430 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cita Erred In Noting That The Hearing Notices Were Remained Uncompiled While The Appellant Had Uploaded Request For Adjournment Against Notice Dated

For Appellant: Vipul ShriyanFor Respondent: Vranda U Matkari
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 430Section 44A

M/S Jasani India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 546/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S Jasani India Private Vs. National E-Assessment Limited, Hw 6010, Tower Centre-Delhi, H,6Th Floor, Bharat Delhi Diamond Bourse, Bkc, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu0081C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sanket Shah Respondent By : Vranda U Matkari Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.02.2023 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. In Not Holding That The Entire Processing Was Done Without Following The Method Prescribed U/S 143(1) & That The Adjustments Made Were Beyond The Scope Of That Section. 2. In Asking The Ao To Verify Whether Or Not Rs.9,008 Of Penalty Was Compensatory In Nature - Whereas It Was Already Pleaded That This Had Been Offered To Tax. 3. In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.516,812 Being Contribution To Pf By Merely Stating That The Judgment Of The Supreme Court In Checkmate Securities P Ltd Applied To The Case-Without Appreciating The Submissions That There Was No Delay In The Making Of These Contributions.”

For Appellant: Sanket ShahFor Respondent: Vranda U Matkari
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Brij Gopal Construction Co. P.Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, New Delhi

In the result, we see no infirmity in the judgment of the High Court

ITA 2123/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Honourable Packaging P Ltd, Dhar vs. The DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 348/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of The Income Tax Return & Can It Be Disallowed In The 143(1).

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)

Anil Prakash Tyagi, Jabapur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 342/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of The Income Tax Return & Can It Be Disallowed In The Intimation Passed U/S. 143(1) Intimation.

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Debipur Union Co-Operative Agricultural Credit Society Limited, Debipur, Purba Bardhaman vs. A.D.I.T., C.P.C., Bengaluru

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

ITA 148/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 271BSection 40Section 80P

Bp International, Salem vs. ADIT, CPC, B'Lore

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

ITA 73/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.73/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 B P International, Vs. The Assistant Director Of No. 82, Sidco Industrial Park, Income Tax, Karuppur Village, Omalur Taluk, Cpc, Bengaluru. Salem 636 011. [Pan:Aajfb0694A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Uttamchand Jain, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 25.08.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 91 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay In Support Of An Affidavit, Medical Certificate As Well

For Appellant: Shri P. Uttamchand Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Jhb Hospitality Services, Mumbai vs. CPC, Bangaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is partly allowed

ITA 332/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blejhb Hospitality Services V. Centralized Processing Centre 10, Daulat Mansion 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha No. 48/1 48/2, Beratenaagrahara Begur Barrack Road, New Marine Lines Hosur Road, Uttarahalli, Holi Mumbai - 400020 Bengaluru-560100 Pan: Aalfj3891R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sunil Hirawat Department Represented By : Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B

Lasons India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst Director of Income Tax, Banglore

ITA 322/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 154(3)