Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 2(24)(x) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 2,270 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2(24)(x)

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. 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.

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.

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.

CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd.
350 ITR 327 · 2013 · High Court
425
citing judgments

Deduction for employee contributions to EPF/ESI is allowable under section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), irrespective of the due dates under the respective welfare fund statutes.

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd.
35 Taxmann.com 616 · 2013 · High Court
304
citing judgments

No disallowance can be made under Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B for delayed payment of employee's contributions to ESI or PF if these amounts are deposited by the assessee on or before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). This aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions for allowability.

M/s Mahadev Cold Storage v. Jurisdictional AO
43 Taxmann.com 33 · 2014 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds are an allowable deduction if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return under section 139(1), even if the payment is made beyond the due date specified by the respective welfare fund Acts, as per the provisions of section 43B.

13/257 Taxman 120/406 ITR 150 (Ker.) 2. CIT v. Gujarat Road Transport Corpn
223 Taxmann 398 · 2014 · High Court
220
citing judgments
CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited
366 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
206
citing judgments

Employees' contribution towards Provident Fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) is allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B if deposited before the due date of filing the income tax return, even if deposited after the expiry of the statutory time period specified in the applicable fund's statute.

Judgments on Section 2(24)(x)

Brisk India Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune

ITA 514/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

Brisk India Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune

ITA 513/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

Mr. Narayana Nippanin Rao, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 1923/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalenarayana Nippanirao, Vs. Dcit, Cpc 22 Revati Nofra, Near Rc Bangalore Church, Colaba, Karnataka - 560500 Mumbai – 400005. Pan/Gir No. : Aadpr8507L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Narayana Rao.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Naina K. Kumar.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr.Narayana Rao.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Naina K. Kumar.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S Ready Roti India Pvt. Ltd., F-28, Riico Industrial Area, Sare Khurd, Alwar vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ACIT/DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 437/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Ready Roti India Pvt. Ltd., F-28, Riico Industrial Area, Sare Khurd, Alwar vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ACIT/DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 436/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Ready Roti India Pvt. Ltd., F-28, Riico Industrial Area, Sare Khurd, Alwar vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ACIT/DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 435/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Naveen Chandra Bhatt, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 206/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Chanel (India) Pvt. Lvt., Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2723/DEL/2022[2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit Vs. Chanel (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 4(2) 123, Maker Chamber Vi, New Delhi Nariman Point, Mumbai New Delhi-400 021 Pan No. Aaccc 4140 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.05.2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

First Choice Ready Mix, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-50(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 612/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, 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 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Pratap Kundu, Bankura Jogipara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bankura

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 591/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, 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 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Ram Narayan Poddar, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-33(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 409/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

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

Namdeo Rambhau Kudale, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 422/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Simple Logic It Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Mumbai

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

ITA 1831/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhsimple Logic It Private Vs. Commissioner Of Income Limited, 10, Arihant, Tax (Appeals) 90 Feet Road, National Faceless Appeal Ghatkopar (E) Centre (Nfac) Maharashtra – 400077 Delhi स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aancs3390M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sanjeev Ranjan Date Of Hearing 11.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.05.2023 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 18.08.2021 For A.Y. 2019-20. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Learned Cit(A)- Nfac, Delhi Erred In Disallowing Claim Of Esic & Provident Fund Even Though The Payment Was Made Within Due Date & Added It To The Total Income Of The Appellant. 2. The Learned Cit(A)- Nfac, Delhi Failed To Consider The Submission Given In Tabular Form Wherein The Esic & Pf Paid Date Wise Were Given. 3. The Learned Cit(A)- Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Consider That The Appellant Has Made Payment On & Before 15/04/2019 Which Within The Due Date As Mentioned In Sec 36(1) (Va) & Much More Prior To Due Date Of Filling Of Roi As The Due Date For The Ay 2019-20 Which Was Extended To 31/10/2019 & Therefore The Assessee Is Eligible For Deduction Of Payment For Esic & Provident Fund Provident. 4. The Learned Cit(A)- Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Consider Various Judgements Covering The Subject Matter.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sanjeev Ranjan
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru/ACIT, Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 61/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 58/5B, B.T. Road, Kolkata-700002 [Pan: Aakcs3206R] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Acit, Circle-7(2), Kolkata….…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. R. Kothari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 16, 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 30.11.2022 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. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “For That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Nfac Erred In Sustaining The Addition On Account Of Alleged Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf/Esi Etc. To The Extent Of Rs.792872/- Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer In Summary Assessment.”

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Wahid Khan, Bhiwadi vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Alwar /DCIT CPC Bengaluru, Alwar/CPC Bengaluru

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

ITA 166/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Nepal Chandra Dey, Ranchi vs. Assitant /Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 63/RAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.63/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Nepal Chandra Dey.……....…...………………......................……...…..….. Appellant 58, Tatisilwai, Gandhi Nagar, Ranchi – 835103. [Pan: Agrpd0835D] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi.…..…..………..…….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.06.2022 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 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Uma Polymers Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Central Processing Centre, Bangaluru

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 63/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyaluma Polymers Limited 215, Raheja Plaza, Off Veera Desai Road Andheri (W) Mumbai- 400053 Pan: Aaacu0748E ...... Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Processing Centre Bangalore, Karnataka-560 500 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U Matkari, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 254Section 254(2)Section 36(1)

I G International Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 146/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

I G. International P Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 145/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

I G International Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal vide ITA No

ITA 144/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 142 To 146/Mum/2023 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21) I.G. International Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(3) Limited, 802, 8Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Akshar Bluechip Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, Thane Belapur Mumbai - 400020 Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai – 400705 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci2508Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ashok Mehta & Dipesh Vora Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): All These 5 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Against Two Different Combined Orders Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Based On Identical Fact & Similar Issue, Therefore, For The Sake Convenience All These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 146/Mum/2023 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals Wherever Applicable. “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, Erred In Reopening Assessment Under Section 147 Without Jurisdiction Based On Surmises & Conjectures. Learned Cit(A)-47 Erred In Confirming The Same.

For Appellant: Ashok Mehta &For Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B