1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.

53 ITR 231Supreme Court of India1964#621 most cited

What is 1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co. authority for?

Income-tax assessment proceedings are administrative in nature, not civil disputes or judicial proceedings between contesting parties. Income-tax authorities act as administrative bodies to estimate income and assess tax, and the proper service of notice within the limitation period is foundational for reassessment jurisdiction.

158

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co. · income tax assessment · administrative proceedings · not civil dispute · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 149 · service of notice · limitation period · reassessment jurisdiction

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 142(1)Section 149Section 143(2)Section 150

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158basection 150(1)section 150section 150(2)unexplained jewellerysection 18section 70section 33(4)

Judgments citing 1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.

Chathankandath Usha, Kootanad vs. Income Tax Officer, Palakkad

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 605/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cochin20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Smt. Jamuna Devi, Sr.D.R
Section 250

…lar assessment, is per a non-speaking order, without any finding and, therefore, of no assistance. The proceedings under the Act, a public law, it may be appreciated are not adversarial proceedings, in the nature of lis (see: Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal & Co. [1964] 53 ITR 321 (SC)), but toward assessment of income chargeable to tax for the year. Assessment of income for that year at Rs.36 lakhs, as against returned Rs.40 lakhs, as for the current year, per a non-speaking order, would be of no consequence. The burden to prove that a receipt is in the nature of income is on the Revenue. However, once that is not in dispu…

Spectrum Foods Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…an & Eastern Newspaper Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax. 24. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd v Union of India AIR 1979 SC 798. 25. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT(Addl) vs Jay Engineering Works Ltd (1978) 113 ITR 389 (Del). 26. Gadgil (SS) vs Lal & Co (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC). 27. Mangilal Jain Vs ITO 315 ITR 105 the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 28. Precision Finance P Ltd 208 ITR 465 the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta. 29. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 48 (SC) Hon’ble Supreme Court. 30. [2018] 90 taxmann.com 147 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA S…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central-1 vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd

ITA/52/2024HC Delhi03 Apr 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…ior to 1-4-1989, would amount to giving sub-section (1) a retrospective operation, which is neither expressly nor impliedly intended by the amended sub-section. xxxx xxxx xxxx 20. This Court took similar view in the case of S.S. Gadgil [(1964) 53 ITR 231 : AIR 1965 SC 171] in somewhat comparable situation arising from the retrospective operation given to Section 34-I of the Income Tax Act, 1922 as amended with retrospective effect from 1-4-1956 by the Finance Act of 1956. In the case of S.S. Gadgil [(1964) 53 ITR 231 : AIR 1965 SC 171] admittedly under clause (iii) of the proviso to Section 3…

Dr. C Usha, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward-3, Palakkad

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 657/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Mar 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmidr. C. Usha Income Tax Officer Modern Hospital Ward -3, Palakkad Guruvayur Road, Koottanad Vs. Palakkad 679533 [Pan:Aafpu8363H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.V. Venkitaraman, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…lar assessment, is per a non-speaking order, without any finding and, therefore, of no assistance. The proceedings under the Act, a public law, it may be appreciated are not adversarial proceedings, in the nature of lis (see: Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal & Co. [1964] 53 ITR 321 (SC)), but toward assessment of income chargeable to tax for the year. Assessment of income for that year at Rs.36 lakhs, as against returned Rs.40 lakhs, as for the current year, per a non-speaking order, would be of no consequence. The burden to prove that a receipt is in the nature of income is on the Revenue. However, once that is not in dispu…

Unnikrishnan. K, Kunnampally vs. The ITO Ward 2, Tirur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms, and his stay petition dismissed

ITA 955/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148(1)

…Tribunal, it could not be a cause of grievance for the assessee, whose data stands accepted by the ld. CIT(A). Proceedings under the Act, a public law, however, are not adversarial proceedings or in the nature of a lis (see: Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal & Co. [1964] 53 ITR 321 (SC)), and the ld. CIT(A) ought to have sought a remand report in the matter from the AO. This is particularly so considering the wide variation in the retail sale, and the concomitant issue of the credibility of the data, furnished, despite being a part of the audited accounts, after a long delay, raising doubts in the matter. That is, the genuin…

The Nehru Memorial Education Society, Kanhangad vs. ITO Exemptions, Kannur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 159/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmithe Nehru Memorial The Income Tax Officer Education Society (Exemptions), Kannur Lakshmi Nivas Vs. Kanhangad - 671315 Kasaragod [Pan:Aabtt0633M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2

…Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC); Parekh Bros. v. CIT [1984] 150 ITR 105 (Ker)). Also see: Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC). Proceedings under the Act, it may be clarified, are not in the nature of a lis (Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal & Co. [1964] 53 ITR 321 (SC)). An incorrect action by the AO, where so, would not bind the Tribunal. So however, in our view, the AO has rightly considered the assessee’s claim u/s.10(23C)(iiiad) in the rectification proceedings. The assessee had in the past been claiming total exemption thereunder and, two, had referred thereto in the ‘Other Details’ section of the retu…

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

…he use of the word material shows that the ITO not being a court can rely upon material which may not be strictly evidence admissible under the Indian Evidence Act for the purpose of making an order of assessment. The Supreme Court in S.S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co. 53 ITR 231 held that the income-tax authorities who have power to assess and recover tax are not acting as judges deciding a litigation between the citizen and the State, they are administrative authorities whose proceedings are regulated by statute, but whose function is to estimate the income of the 13 Lovely promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT taxpayer and to a…

The DCIT, Circle-2(1), Thrissur vs. Sri.K.P. Johny, Thrissur

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dask.P. Johny Asst. Cit, Manappuram House Circle – 2(1) Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Thrissur 680307 Sakthan Thampuran Nagar [Pan:Acgpj4958G] Thrissur 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, K.P. Johny Circle – 2(1) Manappuram House Aayakar Bhavan Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Vs. Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680307 Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Acgpj4958G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, Sr. Advocate (with Smt. Divya Ravindran, Adv. with him)For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 147Section 148(1)Section 69

…(Del))(refer para 2 of the order). There is no estoppel against law, and the proceedings under the Act are not in the nature of lis between the parties nor an assessment there-under a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute (Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal &Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC)). It is, it is to be appreciated, the correct legal position that is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in the matter (CIT v. C. Parakh & Co. (India) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC);Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). In Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex…

Sri.K.P. Johny, Thrissur vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1), Thrissur

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dask.P. Johny Asst. Cit, Manappuram House Circle – 2(1) Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Thrissur 680307 Sakthan Thampuran Nagar [Pan:Acgpj4958G] Thrissur 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, K.P. Johny Circle – 2(1) Manappuram House Aayakar Bhavan Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Vs. Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680307 Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Acgpj4958G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, Sr. Advocate (with Smt. Divya Ravindran, Adv. with him)For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 147Section 148(1)Section 69

…(Del))(refer para 2 of the order). There is no estoppel against law, and the proceedings under the Act are not in the nature of lis between the parties nor an assessment there-under a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute (Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal &Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC)). It is, it is to be appreciated, the correct legal position that is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in the matter (CIT v. C. Parakh & Co. (India) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC);Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). In Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex…

Ojin Bakers & Restaurant, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward 1(1), Kozhikode

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 184/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri.R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69C

…would, upon the Bench so observing, object, stating that the issue before us is limited to the validity or otherwise of the Revenue’s action in not allowing indirect expenditure. Tax proceedings are not in the nature of lis [Gadgil (S.S.) v. Lal & Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC)], and the true import of the tax assessment is the determination of correct income chargeable to tax and, resultantly, the correct tax liability. The findings by the lower authorities are not binding on the Tribunal and, further, it is the correct legal positionthat is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in th…

Good Homes Pvt Ltd, Kochi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 884/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, AM &ShriAbyT.Varkey, JM ITA No.870/Coch/2022: Asst.Year: 2007-2008 Ajit Associates Private Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Puthuran Plaza Income-tax, Corp.Cir.1(1) vs. KPCC Junction Kochi. Ernakulam – 682 011. [PAN: AAGCA9157P] (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.884/Coch/2022: Asst.Year: 2007-2008 Good Homes Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Puthuran Plaza Income-tax, Corp.Cir.1(1) vs. KPCC Junction Kochi. Ernakulam – 682 011. [PAN: AABCG0444L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri.A.Gopalakr…

Ajit Associates Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. JCIT, Corporate Range - 1, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 870/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, AM &ShriAbyT.Varkey, JM ITA No.870/Coch/2022: Asst.Year: 2007-2008 Ajit Associates Private Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Puthuran Plaza Income-tax, Corp.Cir.1(1) vs. KPCC Junction Kochi. Ernakulam – 682 011. [PAN: AAGCA9157P] (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.884/Coch/2022: Asst.Year: 2007-2008 Good Homes Private Limited The Deputy Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Puthuran Plaza Income-tax, Corp.Cir.1(1) vs. KPCC Junction Kochi. Ernakulam – 682 011. [PAN: AABCG0444L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri.A.Gopalakr…

Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Shri. Suryakant C Suchak, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 965/MUM/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसुं. 965/भ ुं/2020 (यन.ि.1999-2000) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(4),Mumbai, Room No.1925, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ...... अऩीराथी/Appellant फनाभ Vs. Shri Suryakant C. Suchak, 231, Krishna, 32-A Cross, 7Th Block, Jaynagar, Bangalore – 560 070. ..... प्रयििादी/Respondent Pan:Apjps-8359-A अऩीराथी द्िाया/ Appellant By : Smt. Esther Ninghauvung Hanghal प्रयििादी द्िाया/Respondent By : Shri Dilip Thakkar स निाई की यिधथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2023 घोषणा की यिधथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/04/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai *In Short ‘The Cit(A)’+ Dated 26/11/2019, For Assessment Year 1999-2000. 2 2. The Revenue In Its Appeal Has Assailed The Order Of Cit(A) On Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Smt. Esther Ninghauvung HanghalFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Thakkar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(c)Section 69

…आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण भ ुंफई ऩीठ “ई”, भ ुंफई ऩीठ श्री विकास अिस्थी, न्मायमक सदस्म एिुं श्री गगन गोमर, रेखाकाय सदस्म के सभक्ष IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसुं. 965/भ ुं/2020 (यन.ि.1999-2000) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(4),Mumbai, Room No.1925, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ...... अऩीराथी/Appellant फनाभ Vs. Shri Suryakant C. Suchak, 231, Krishna, 32-A Cross, 7th Block, Jaynagar, Bangalore – 560 070. ..... प्रयििादी/Respondent PAN:APJPS-8359-A अऩीर…

The ACIT-Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Rajkot

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 130/RJT/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Income-Tax, 7Th Floor, Mansrovar Central Circle-2, Apartment, Royal Park, Rajkot Kalawad Road, Rajkot Pan : Agqpm 6495 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 22.01.2020 Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2004-05. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(c)Section 149(3)Section 250(6)

…5-02-2019 in the case of Shri Ravichandra V Mehta, the Hon'ble ITAT has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Braham Dutt Vs. ACIT 100 taxmann.com 324, the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S Gadgil Vs. Lal & Co. 53 ITR 231, and in the matter of K M Sharma v/s ITO 254 ITR 772 where in it has been held that when the time limit for issuing notice u/s. 148 has expired before any amendment in law from a prospective date will not revive. The decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shri Ravichandra V Mehta is as under "10. Thus, in all above cases Courts have held that…

Hazari Lal Kesari Chand, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-48(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8561/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148

…idence only and to establish the evasion beyond doubt as in criminal proceedings. In making such an observation I draw strength from a similar enunciation by the Apex Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT 26 ITR 777 and SS Gadgil V Lai & Co 53 ITR 231 as well as the observation of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Jay Engg Works Ltd 113 ITR 389. Reference may also be made to the case of Jankinath Sarangj v. State of Orissa, wherein Hidayatullah. C.J., observed: 30 Hazari Lal Kesari Chand, ND. there is no doubt that if the principles of natural justice are violated and there…

Sln Coffee Curing Works, Kudloor vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore

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

ITA 571/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 132Section 153CSection 69

…ing addition towards this. Further, we take support from the following judgements: (i) With regard to placing reliance on the entries in loose slips to make additions, in our opinion, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S. Gadgil v. Lal and Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC), held as under: “9. A proceeding for assessment is not a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute. That an income-tax proceeding is in the nature of a judicial proceeding between contesting parties is a matter which is not capable of even a plausible argument. The income-tax authorities who have power to assess and recover tax are not acting…

Sln Coffee Curing Works, Kudloor vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore

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

ITA 570/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 132Section 153CSection 69

…ing addition towards this. Further, we take support from the following judgements: (i) With regard to placing reliance on the entries in loose slips to make additions, in our opinion, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S. Gadgil v. Lal and Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC), held as under: “9. A proceeding for assessment is not a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute. That an income-tax proceeding is in the nature of a judicial proceeding between contesting parties is a matter which is not capable of even a plausible argument. The income-tax authorities who have power to assess and recover tax are not acting…

Sln Coffee Curing Works, Kudloor vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore

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

ITA 569/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 132Section 153CSection 69

…ing addition towards this. Further, we take support from the following judgements: (i) With regard to placing reliance on the entries in loose slips to make additions, in our opinion, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S. Gadgil v. Lal and Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC), held as under: “9. A proceeding for assessment is not a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute. That an income-tax proceeding is in the nature of a judicial proceeding between contesting parties is a matter which is not capable of even a plausible argument. The income-tax authorities who have power to assess and recover tax are not acting…

DCIT Central Circle-04, New Delhi vs. Karamjit Jaiswal (L/H of Ladli Pershad Jaiswal), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4826/DEL/2019[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)

…provisions which were on the statute book prior to 1-4-1989 should be applicable to the case of the assessee involving assessment years 1981-1982 & 1982-83 and not the amended provisions. 16. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of S.S. Gadgil vs. Lal & Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231(SC) held that amended provisions will not reinstate the jurisdiction to reassess the return which is otherwise time-barred as per existing provisions for the relevant assessment year. 17. On a conspectus of judicial pronouncements and on reading of statute, it thus transpires that amended law seeking to extend the time limit to cover the case for…

DCIT, Central Circle- 4, New Delhi vs. Anand Pershad Jaiswal, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4824/DEL/2019[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)

…provisions which were on the statute book prior to 1-4-1989 should be applicable to the case of the assessee involving assessment years 1981-1982 & 1982-83 and not the amended provisions. 16. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of S.S. Gadgil vs. Lal & Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231(SC) held that amended provisions will not reinstate the jurisdiction to reassess the return which is otherwise time-barred as per existing provisions for the relevant assessment year. 17. On a conspectus of judicial pronouncements and on reading of statute, it thus transpires that amended law seeking to extend the time limit to cover the case for…