12 M/s Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur v. ACIT, Jaipur (iv) Heirs and LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel Vs. CIT (Guj)

222 CTR 138High Court2009#23708 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 362,844 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 131 Section 132B Section 133A Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 145(3)Section 153A

Judgments citing 12 M/s Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur v. ACIT, Jaipur (iv) Heirs and LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel Vs. CIT (Guj)

Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Cen. Cir-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…to render their explanation in that behalf. (b) KALRA GLUE FACTORY VS SALES TAX TRIBUNAL ORS (167 ITR 498) SC Statement which was not tested by cross examination is not good evidence. (c) HEIRS AND LRs OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S PATE VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (222 CTR 138) HC Gujrat The legal effect of the statement recorded behind the back of the assessee and without furnishing the copy thereof to the assessee or without giving an opportunity of cross-examination, is that if the addition is made, the same is required to be deleted on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. (d) PRAKASH CHAND…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Nisha Jain, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

ITA 378/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 131

…al statement. After elaborate judicial analysis of the legal position, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the assessee and vacated the orders of all the lower authorities. 4.4.7 Also refer Heris and LRs of Late Laxman Bhai S. Patel v/s CIT (2009) 222 CTR 138 (Guj). 4.5 Statement of assessee can’t be incriminating material: 4.5.1 ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad v. Himalaya Darshan Developers (Gujarat) (P.) Ltd [2021] 128 taxmann.com 435 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) held as under: “Besides the above, the Assessing Officer has also made reference to the statement of the director of 'SJSL' recorded under sec…

M/So. Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 104/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 37Section 40Section 43C

…ve expediency. Such a rejection would amount to denial of reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and vitiate the assessment." 12 M/s Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur (iv) Heirs and LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel Vs. CIT (Guj) (2009) 222 CTR 138 Legal effect of the statement recorded behind the back of the assesses and without furnishing the copy thereof to the assessee or without giving an opportunity of cross-examination, is that if the addition is made, the same is required to be deleted on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. Further the action of the learn…