26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

63 ITR 449Supreme Court of India1967#3495 most cited

What is 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT authority for?

Suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute for proof in income tax assessments. The Assessing Officer must present evidence and allow for cross-examination of material relied upon.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT · 26 ITR 775 (SC) · suspicion vs proof · onus of proof · natural justice · cross-examination · assessment procedure · section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 69CSection 68Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 133ASection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 39onus of proofsection 111asection 5(2)substantive assessmentexplanation to section 37audi alteram partemnon application of mindkelvinatorpaper company

Judgments citing 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2388/KOL/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…ted that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof. . For this proposition one may refer to decisions in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd.63 ITR 449 (SC) and Anil Tibrewala v. ITO(2004) 1 SOT 90 (Mum); CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull 53 ITR 574 (SC); Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel(2016) 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.). 24. It is further submitted that the findings of the AO in the concluding portion of the order of assessment (Page-28) was as follows: ………

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2385/KOL/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…ted that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof. . For this proposition one may refer to decisions in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd.63 ITR 449 (SC) and Anil Tibrewala v. ITO(2004) 1 SOT 90 (Mum); CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull 53 ITR 574 (SC); Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel(2016) 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.). 24. It is further submitted that the findings of the AO in the concluding portion of the order of assessment (Page-28) was as follows: ………

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…am\nTraders (1976) 102 ITR 366 (Ker); International Forest Co. V. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 721 (J&K);\nSTO v Uttareswari Rice Mills (1973) 89 ITR 6 (SC); Motipur Zamindari Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Ag ITO\n(1972) 83 ITR 778 (Pat); CIT v East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. (1967) 63 ITR 449 (SC),\nHarmukhraiDulichand v CIT (1928) 3 ITC 198 (Cal.).\nThis requirement of pre-communication to the Assessee did not find mention in the pre-\n1961 Act, but courts had held on principles of equity, justice and good conscience that the\nmaterial gathered behind the back of the Assessee should be communicated the assessee (Gunda\nSubbayya v CIT…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…raders [1976] 102 ITR 366 (Ker.); International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J&K) ; STO v. Uttareswari Rice Mills [1973] 89 ITR 6 (SC); Motipur Zamindari Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Agrl ITO [1972] 83 ITR 778 (Pat.); CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC); Harmukhrai Dulichand v. CIT [1928] 3 ITC 198 (Cal.) 63. Thus it is well settled that the Assessing Officer has to confront the assessee with the material collected behind the back of the assessee, if he chooses to use the material against the assessee and that he should provide the assessee an opportunity of cross- examination. Not having do…

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-2, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…raders [1976] 102 ITR 366 (Ker.); International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J&K) ; STO v. Uttareswari Rice Mills [1973] 89 ITR 6 (SC); Motipur Zamindari Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Agrl ITO [1972] 83 ITR 778 (Pat.); CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC); Harmukhrai Dulichand v. CIT [1928] 3 ITC 198 (Cal.) 63. Thus it is well settled that the Assessing Officer has to confront the assessee with the material collected behind the back of the assessee, if he chooses to use the material against the assessee and that he should provide the assessee an opportunity of cross- examination. Not having do…

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 118/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…rily used. The Assessing Officer is not fettered or bound by technical rules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act and he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of low. 26 ITR 775 (S.C), 45 ITR 206 (S.C). 63 ITR 449 (S.C). Thus, the assessment can be made on the basis of inference on evidence which in criminal or civil justice may be insufficient. Further, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs Vs. D. Bhoormal A.R. 1974 SC 859, the department is not required to prove 10 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur…

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 117/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

…rily used. The Assessing Officer is not fettered or bound by technical rules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act and he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of low. 26 ITR 775 (S.C), 45 ITR 206 (S.C). 63 ITR 449 (S.C). Thus, the assessment can be made on the basis of inference on evidence which in criminal or civil justice may be insufficient. Further, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs Vs. D. Bhoormal A.R. 1974 SC 859, the department is not required to prove 10 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

…howsoever strong cannot take the character of evidence. For this proposition assessee relies on Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC) and Anil Tibrewala v. ITO [2004] 1 SOT 90 (Mum); CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull [1964] 53 ITR 574 (SC); Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel [2016] 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.).” 6. The learned CIT(A), considering the above submissions of the assessee, deleted the addition of ` 7.50 crore made by…

ADITYA BAHETI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

ITA 562/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Ms. Nupur Khandelwal, C.A ( V.H.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148

…s supported by official quotation issued byMagadh Stock Exchange, therefore, there can not be any reason to doubt the genuineness of the sale transaction of the shares. It is settled position of law by the decisions reported in 26 ITR 776(SC), 37 ITR 288(SC), 63 ITR 449(SC) and 1 SOT90(Mum)(supra)tosupportthatsuspicionevenstrongenoughcannottake the character of evidence. Consideringthefactthattheshareswereallottedtotheassessewhichwerekept in demat account, the decision was made in favour of assesse. The AO has doubted the transactions of purchase and sale of shares by the assessee of M/s. Tarbo Tech Ltd. on the b…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2) , MUMBAI vs. SHRI VIRAL SARAF MITTAL , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1843/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 2(2) V. Viral Saraf Mittal Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 901/902, Capri Heights Old Cgo Annex Building Palli Hill, Bandra (W) M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Azbps0317C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sidharth Kothari Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT – Central Circle – 2(2) v. Viral Saraf Mittal Room No. 806, 8th Floor 901/902, Capri Heights Old CGO Annex Building Palli Hill, Bandra (W) M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 PAN: AZBPS0317C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Sidharth Kothari Department Represented by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik Date of conclusion of Hearing : 23.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 23.02.2024 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal…

THE DCIT CIRCLE 5(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S L N MALVIYA INFRA PROJECTS P LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 189/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit, Circle 5(1) M/S. L.N. Malviya Infra Projects Bhopal Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.29, F/F Sector, Dwarka Vs. New Delhi

Section 234ASection 3(3)Section 37(1)

…ed by the assesse. Therefore, adhoc disallowance made by the AO is not permitted and the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the said disallowance made by the AO. He has further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. 63 ITR 449(SC) has held that where the assesse appears in response to a notice issued by the AO and produced the evidence in support of the return filed by him, the AO is bound to take into consideration all evidence was produced. The AO while making disallowance has not even issued any show cause to the assessee to point out any defect in the books of accou…

CLAYTON CHARLES PINTO,MUMBAI vs. INT TAX WARD 3(3)(1) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 102/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleclayton Charles Pinto Mumbai. V. Int Tax Ward 3(3)(1) Mumbai. Air India Building, Mumbai- 400021 303 Palm Beach Apartments, 31 J P Road, Andheri West Mumbai- 400061

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IT v. Agile Properties (P) Ltd. [2014] 45 taxmann.com 512/225 Taxman 107 (Delhi) (Mag.)].  Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC),  Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC),  CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC)  Anil Tibrewala v. ITO [2004] 1 SOT 90 (Mum);  CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull [1964] 53 ITR 574 (SC);  Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC); Page No. | 13 CLAYTON CHARLES PINTO  Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel [2016] 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.).  Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs. DCIT (2019) 33 NYPTTJ 740 (Mum.)(Trib.)  Sm…

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…arily used. The Assessing Officer is not fettered or bound by technical rules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act and he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of law. 26 ITR775 (S.C), 45 ITR 206 (S.C), 63 ITR 449 (S.C). Thus, the assessment can be made on the basis of inference on evidence which in criminal or civil justice may be insufficient. Further, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs Vs. D. Bhoormal A.R. 1974 SC 859, the department is not required to prove its case with mathematical Page 9 of 21 Shri Rupesh Vyas Assessm…

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/IND/2020[150-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…arily used. The Assessing Officer is not fettered or bound by technical rules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act and he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of law. 26 ITR775 (S.C), 45 ITR 206 (S.C), 63 ITR 449 (S.C). Thus, the assessment can be made on the basis of inference on evidence which in criminal or civil justice may be insufficient. Further, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs Vs. D. Bhoormal A.R. 1974 SC 859, the department is not required to prove its case with mathematical precision towards demonstrable degree; f…

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MANISH VIJAY MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 494/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…al was brought on record. Nor such material was providing during appellate proceeding. 15. The assessment made on the basis of materials not brought to the notice of the taxpayer are violating the principles of natural justice (East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, 63 ITR 449 (SC)). Even if he collects information from private sources, he is duty- bound to disclose the substance of the enquiry to the assessee before making the assessment. 16. It is submitted that this is against the rule of natural justice and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings require to be held as null and void. Page 179 182 of paper book…

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MANISH VIJAY MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 493/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…al was brought on record. Nor such material was providing during appellate proceeding. 15. The assessment made on the basis of materials not brought to the notice of the taxpayer are violating the principles of natural justice (East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, 63 ITR 449 (SC)). Even if he collects information from private sources, he is duty- bound to disclose the substance of the enquiry to the assessee before making the assessment. 16. It is submitted that this is against the rule of natural justice and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings require to be held as null and void. Page 179 182 of paper book…

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. URVI MANISH MEHRA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 492/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…al was brought on record. Nor such material was providing during appellate proceeding. 15. The assessment made on the basis of materials not brought to the notice of the taxpayer are violating the principles of natural justice (East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, 63 ITR 449 (SC)). Even if he collects information from private sources, he is duty- bound to disclose the substance of the enquiry to the assessee before making the assessment. 16. It is submitted that this is against the rule of natural justice and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings require to be held as null and void. Page 179 182 of paper book…

THE DY CIT (IT)-CIRCLE-3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. URVI MANISH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 491/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…al was brought on record. Nor such material was providing during appellate proceeding. 15. The assessment made on the basis of materials not brought to the notice of the taxpayer are violating the principles of natural justice (East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, 63 ITR 449 (SC)). Even if he collects information from private sources, he is duty- bound to disclose the substance of the enquiry to the assessee before making the assessment. 16. It is submitted that this is against the rule of natural justice and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings require to be held as null and void. Page 179 182 of paper book…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, BELLARY vs. M/S AURO MINERALS , HOSPET

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1543/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…in those passages and to adduce evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein. Reference in this connection may be made to a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC) where it was held that the report of the Income-tax Investigation Commission could not be relied upon without giving an opportunity to the assessee to explain the passages of the report sought to be relied upon and to tender evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein. 23. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the income-tax…

M/S AURO MINERALS ,HOSPET vs. JOINT COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX BELLARY RANGE , BELLARY

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1329/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…in those passages and to adduce evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein. Reference in this connection may be made to a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd, [1967] 63 ITR 449 (SC) where it was held that the report of the Income-tax Investigation Commission could not be relied upon without giving an opportunity to the assessee to explain the passages of the report sought to be relied upon and to tender evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein. 23. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the income-tax…

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT (63 ITR 449) — Cited in 34 Judgments | BharatTax