293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal

295 ITR 105High Court2007#1033 most cited
105

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal · 293 ITR 43 · Delhi High Court · Section 153A · Section 153C · Section 132(4) statement · Section 68 cash credits · Section 69C unexplained expenditure · evidentiary value · burden of proof · search assessment · natural justice principles

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 143(2)Section 69CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 115adsection 2(1a)section 2(1)section 66section 36(i)(va)section 153a proceedingssection 60section 63section 2(14)(iii)section 35(1)(ii)section 115atrue and full disclosure

Judgments citing 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. M B Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 267/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3923/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. M. B. Power (Madhaya Pradesh) Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3874/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 20, Delhi vs. M.B. Power (Madhaya Pradesh) Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3870/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, South East Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Alpesh K. Ajmera HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 18(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 4041/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 132Section 147Section 68Section 69

…hellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 at pagе по. 714; Hon'ble Delhi High Court 25 ITA No. 4041/Mum/2025 Alpesh K. Ajmera HUF Mumbai. decision in the case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 and CIT vs. Pradeep Gupta 303 ITR 95 and CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. 295 ITR 105.Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case and respectfully following the aforesaid precedents on identical facts and circumstances, the addition in dispute is deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 21. Commissioner of Income-tax-I v.Maheshchandra G. Vakil[2013] 40 taxmann.com 326 (Gujarat HC) Where assessee pr…

Unimax Chemicals Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in allowed

ITA 4070/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

…d the Assessing Officer. We note that not providing the opportunity of cross- examination is against the principle of natural justice and for that we rely of- the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the- case of CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prern Chand Ltd. (2007)- 295 ITR 105, 108 (del). We note that on identical facts, the similar proposition was upheld by the Coordinate Bench of Kolkata in the case of Rajda Polymers, ITA No.333/Kol/2017for Assessment Year 2013-14 wherein it was held as follows:- 10. ....Thus we note from the entire facts and circumstances, that the AO got swayed away with the statement recorded on o…

DCIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Devidayal Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) vs DCIT, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.3874, 3870, 3923/Del/2023 [Assessment Year : 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19] DCIT, vs M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Central Circle-20, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi Nehru Place, Delhi -110019. PAN-AAFCM6698A APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment…

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

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

ITA 2363/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 153DSection 69BSection 69C

…18 ITR 315 (SC) CIT v. Odeon Builders (P) Ltd. ii) 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishnichandChellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal xi) ITA No(s)3185, 3186 & 3253/D/2015 (Del) PCIT vs. PavitraRealcon (P) Ltd. xii) ITA No. 645/2019 (Del) dated 23.9.2024 PCIT v. Moon Beverages Ltd. III That it is a ca…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Devine Infracon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3068/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: M Balaganesh, Accontant Member & Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Vs. M/S Divine Infracon Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Plot Tax, Central Circle-09, No. 4, Sector-13, Jhandewalan, New Delhi, Dwarka City Centre, Room No.357, Ara Centre, Dwarka, New Delhi- E-2, Jhandewalan 110075 Extension, New Delhi Pan :Aaccd4476A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr, Advocate Department By Shri T James Singson, Cit, Dr

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…finding that the amount of Rs. 1,07,350 was remitted by the assessee from Madras and that it represented the concealed income of the assessee." [Emphasis Supplied] ii) 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT V SMC Share Stock Brokers iii) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT VS M Aggarwal iv) 295 ITR 105(Del) CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd iv) 207 CTR 115 CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta 5.8 - It is further submitted that appellant had produced all the evidences to substantiate the identity of the investors, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the investors, and the investors who are assessed to tax, have also duly confirmed the fa…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…on, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del) Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT xi) 2024 SCC Online Del 4012 PCIT vs. Pavitra Realcon (P) Ltd. (pages 438-451 of JPB-II) 13 THAT STATEMENTS HAS BEEN…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…on, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del) Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT xi) 2024 SCC Online Del 4012 PCIT vs. Pavitra Realcon (P) Ltd. (pages 438-451 of JPB-II) 13 THAT STATEMENTS HAS BEEN…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…on, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del) Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT xi) 2024 SCC Online Del 4012 PCIT vs. Pavitra Realcon (P) Ltd. (pages 438-451 of JPB-II) 13 THAT STATEMENTS HAS BEEN…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…on, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del) Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT xi) 2024 SCC Online Del 4012 PCIT vs. Pavitra Realcon (P) Ltd. (pages 438-451 of JPB-II) 13 THAT STATEMENTS HAS BEEN…

Goyal Vegoils Limited, Kasar, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle -2, Kota

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

ITA 243/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…Vs. Rajesh Kumar (2008) 306 ITR 27 (Del) (xi) Heirs & LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel Vs. CIT (2009) 222 CTR (Guj) 138 (xii) CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta (2008) 303 ITR 95 (Del) 20 Goyal Vegoils Ltd. vs. DCIT (xiii) CIT Vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. (2007) 295 ITR 105 (Del) (xiv) CIT Vs. A.N. Dyaneswaran (2008) 297 ITR 135 (Mad) (xv) CIT Vs. S.M Aggarwal 292 ITR 43 (xvi) Straptex India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2003] 84 ITD 320 (Mum) (xvii) R.W. Promotions (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 54 (Bom.) (xviii) Obulapuram Mining Co, (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 160 ITD 224 (Bang. - Trib.) (xix) CIT v. Indrajit Singh…

Rajrajeshwari Gupta, Kota vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 245/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…(2009) 316 ITR 328 (Kar) (x) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar (2008) 306 ITR 27 (Del) (xi) Heirs & LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel Vs. CIT (2009) 222 CTR (Guj) 138 (xii) CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta (2008) 303 ITR 95 (Del) (xiii) CIT Vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. (2007) 295 ITR 105 (Del) (xiv) CIT Vs. A.N. Dyaneswaran (2008) 297 ITR 135 (Mad) (xv) CIT Vs. S.M Aggarwal 292 ITR 43 (xvi) Straptex India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2003] 84 ITD 320 (Mum) (xvii) R.W. Promotions (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 54 (Bom.) (xviii) Obulapuram Mining Co, (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 160 ITD 224 (Bang. - Trib.) (xix) CIT v. Indrajit Singh…

Chemstar International, Mumbai vs. DCIT- 24(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3799/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Jm) I.T.A. Nos. 3798 & 3799/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2015-16 & Ay. 2014-15) Chemstar International Vs. Dcit-24(1) 102-D, Nirman Palace, Piramal Chambers, Pump House, Rajmata Lalbaug, Mumbai- Jijabai Road, Andheri 400012. East, Mumbai-400093. Pan : Aabfc8974G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain Department By Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing 19.06.2024 Dateof Pronouncement 05.07.2024 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (Am) :-

Section 133ASection 35(1)(ii)

…and the Assessing Officer. We note that not providing the opportunity of cross- examination is against the principle of natural justice and for that we rely of- the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prern Chand Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 105, 108 (del). We note that on identical facts, the similar proposition was upheld by the Coordinate Bench of Kolkata in the case of Rajda Polymers, ITA No.333/Kol/2017for Assessment Year 2013-14 wherein it was held as follows:- "10. ....Thus we note from the entire facts and circumstances, that the AO got swayed away with the statement recorded on…

Chemstar International, Mumbai vs. DCIT-24(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3798/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Jm) I.T.A. Nos. 3798 & 3799/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2015-16 & Ay. 2014-15) Chemstar International Vs. Dcit-24(1) 102-D, Nirman Palace, Piramal Chambers, Pump House, Rajmata Lalbaug, Mumbai- Jijabai Road, Andheri 400012. East, Mumbai-400093. Pan : Aabfc8974G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain Department By Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing 19.06.2024 Dateof Pronouncement 05.07.2024 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (Am) :-

Section 133ASection 35(1)(ii)

…and the Assessing Officer. We note that not providing the opportunity of cross- examination is against the principle of natural justice and for that we rely of- the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prern Chand Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 105, 108 (del). We note that on identical facts, the similar proposition was upheld by the Coordinate Bench of Kolkata in the case of Rajda Polymers, ITA No.333/Kol/2017for Assessment Year 2013-14 wherein it was held as follows:- "10. ....Thus we note from the entire facts and circumstances, that the AO got swayed away with the statement recorded on…

The Principal Commissioner vs. M/S Obulapuram Mining

ITA/100091/2016HC Karnataka17 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

…is evidence in the case. There was, therefore, no material on the basis of which the learned Munsif could decide the suit on merits in this case....." (P-40) He relied upon the decision in the case CIT Vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. reported in (2007) 295 ITR 105 (Del), wherein it is held as under: “The fact remains that the CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the assessee was not given permission to cross-examine the analyst who had prepared the test report obtained from the Shri Ram Institute for Industrial Research and that was enough to vitiate the assessment order. 9. There is no doubt that e…