315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT v. OM Overseas

320 ITR 116High Court#7415 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also reported as

64 DTR 409

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 69CSection 153ASection 153CSection 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 153DSection 147

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationthird party informationonus of proofsection 153(c)section 164income tax settlement commissionsection 31

Judgments citing 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT v. OM Overseas

KDJP STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

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

ITA 5900/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Kdjp Steels Private Limited, Vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Plot No.50, Flat No.A-201, Delhi. Parshav Vihar, Patpar Ganj, Delhi – 110 092. Pan: Aacck6905F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate; Shri R.P. Mall, Advocate; Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca & Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…ailable in cash book could not be held to be unexplained u/s 69A or section 68 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: a) 441 ITR 550 PCIT vs Agson Global (P) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) b) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas b) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. 5 c) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports d) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays e) ITA No. 999/2010 dated 03.08.2010 CIT vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. f) ITA No. 165/2010 dated 04.05.2017 CIT vs. M/s Pashupati Nath Agro Food Products (P) Ltd 5.3 Once cash sales to th…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…) CIT vs. Smt. Poonam Rani iv) 324 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Jas Jack Elegance Exports v) ITA No. 796/2011 (Del) dated 3.05.2012 CIT vs. Winner Constructions (P) Ltd.) vi) 372 ITR 381 (Del) CIT v. Zohra Emporium VI) vii) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas viii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. ix) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports x) ITA No. 165/2010 dated 04.05.2017 (All) CIT vs. M/s Pashupati Nath Agro Food Products (P) Ltd xi) 316 ITR 120 (Raj) Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. ACIT xii) ITA No. 336/Ind/2012 dated 31.10.2012 ACIT vs. Dewas Soya Ltd. 15 It is also submitt…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDI GOBINDGARH vs. GAURAV SINGHI, PRAGATIE STEELS,

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 955/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 133

…gment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Marg Ltd. as reported in 84 taxmann.com 52 (Madras). v). CIT vs. Anil Kumar & Co. in ITA No. 200001 & 200002 vide order dated 25.02.2016 (Karnataka HC) vi). 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas 8 vii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. viii) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays 16. It was further argued that the estimation @ 12.5% of the total purchases in respect of 8 parties totalling to Rs. 10,58,74,302/-, amounting to Rs., 1,32,34,287/- as made by the CIT(A) was bad in law. It was further argued that regarding 12.5…

GAURAV SINGHI, PRAGATIE STEELS, NEAR SAI MANDIR ROAD, NASRALI,GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. ASSESSMENT UNITS NFAC DELHI, JURISDITIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER IT0-WARD-2, MANDI GOBINDGARH, PUNJAB

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 889/CHANDI/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 133

…gment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Marg Ltd. as reported in 84 taxmann.com 52 (Madras). v). CIT vs. Anil Kumar & Co. in ITA No. 200001 & 200002 vide order dated 25.02.2016 (Karnataka HC) vi). 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas 8 vii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. viii) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays 16. It was further argued that the estimation @ 12.5% of the total purchases in respect of 8 parties totalling to Rs. 10,58,74,302/-, amounting to Rs., 1,32,34,287/- as made by the CIT(A) was bad in law. It was further argued that regarding 12.5…

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…ance of the manufactured goods from the godown under control of Central Excise Department and our declared sales was accepted year after year and in view of this fact no such addition could be made. Kindly consider Allahabad High Court decision as reported in 320 ITR 116 in the case of CIT Vs. Mascot (India) Tools & Forges Pvt. Ltd. (Copy of the order at page …. Of the paper books) 29. That Sir, the most important fact that even for the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2004-05, originally the assessment was made Under Section 143(3) of the act vide order dated 19.12.2006 by the Deputy Commissioner o…

M/S KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 379/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…ance of the manufactured goods from the godown under control of Central Excise Department and our declared sales was accepted year after year and in view of this fact no such addition could be made. Kindly consider Allahabad High Court decision as reported in 320 ITR 116 in the case of CIT Vs. Mascot (India) Tools & Forges Pvt. Ltd. (Copy of the order at page …. Of the paper books) 29. That Sir, the most important fact that even for the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2004-05, originally the assessment was made Under Section 143(3) of the act vide order dated 19.12.2006 by the Deputy Commissioner o…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections\nare dismissed

ITA 993/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…ed in 49 taxmann.com 489 (Jodhpur\nBench)\nd) ITO vs. Pranab Prakash Dutta in ITA No.1492/Kol/2011 vide order dated\n25.06.2012.\ne) ITO vs. M/s Rajeev & Company in ITA No. 46/Lkw/2012 vide order dated\n17.12.2014\nf) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas\ng) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd.\nh) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports\ni) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays\n“6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account\nbooks maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining\nregular books of accounts, which…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 992/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…reported in 49 taxmann.com 489 (Jodhpur Bench) d) ITO vs. Pranab Prakash Dutta in ITA No 1492/Kol/2011 vide order dated 25.06.2012. e) ITO vs. M/s Rajeev & Company in ITA No. 46/Lkw/2012 vide order dated 17.12.2014 f) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas g) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. h) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports i) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays “6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account books maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining regular books of accounts, which were…

KHOOBSOORAT FABRICS PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 14(3), NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

ITA 428/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 68

…se circumstances no addition is permissible on account of cash deposit arising out of sale proceeds and cash withdrawals and, appellant in this regard seeks to place reliance upon following judicial pronouncements: i) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas ii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports iv) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays (extract at page 175 of Paper Book and pages 10-13 of JPB) v) ITA No. 999/2010 dated 03.08.2010 CIT vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. (extract at page 175 of Paper Book) vi) ITA No. 336/Ind/2012 da…

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

…ce of rejection of books of accounts, no addition can be made by assuming that assessee has made unaccounted receipts or made unaccounted payments in the instant year. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas ii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. iii) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports iv) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays “6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account books maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining regular books of accounts, which we…

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

…ce of rejection of books of accounts, no addition can be made by assuming that assessee has made unaccounted receipts or made unaccounted payments in the instant year. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas ii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. iii) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports iv) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays “6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account books maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining regular books of accounts, which we…

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

…ce of rejection of books of accounts, no addition can be made by assuming that assessee has made unaccounted receipts or made unaccounted payments in the instant year. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas ii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. iii) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports iv) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays “6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account books maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining regular books of accounts, which we…

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

…ce of rejection of books of accounts, no addition can be made by assuming that assessee has made unaccounted receipts or made unaccounted payments in the instant year. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas ii) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. iii) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports iv) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays “6 The AO has not pointed out any specific defect or discrepancy in the account books maintained by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee had been maintaining regular books of accounts, which we…

RAKESH VAID,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 62(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA no

ITA 7821/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…e books of accounts maintained by the appellant, the learned Assessing Officer was not 13 Rakesh Vaid Vs. ITO justified to reject the claim of appellant. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: a) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas b) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. c) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports d) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays e) ITA No. 999/2010 dated 03.08.2010 CIT vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. in, “3 It is settled law that in revenue matters, the onus of proof is not a static one. Though the initial burden of pr…

SMT. RUKSANA,JHALAWAR vs. ITO, WARD, JHALAWAR

ITA 192/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 192/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Smt. Ruksana, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. L/H Of Late Sh. Mohammed Salim, Ward-Jhalawar. Kunjda Street, Bada Bazar, Jhalawar City, Jhalawar-326001. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Bjeps 1293 M Appellant Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 08/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Kota Dated 21/09/2017 For The A.Y. 2011-12. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee In This Appeal Are As Under: “1. The Impugned Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Dated 15.03.2014 Is Bad In Law & On Facts Of The Case, For Want Of Jurisdiction, Being Debatable Issue & Various Other Reasons & Hence The Same May Kindly Be Quashed. 2.1 Rs.13,45,442/-: The Assessing Officer Has Grossly Erred In Law As Well As On The Facts Of The Case In Invoking The Provision Of Section 145(3). The Provision So Invoked By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) Being Totally Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts On The Record & Hence The Same May Kindly Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234

…penditure of Rs.2,16,832/- i.e 1.95% which is not at all possible in this line of business. When the fruits cannot be kept in stock for much time. The fruits become useless after some time and had to throw. In CIT v/s Mascot (India) Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. 320 ITR 116 (All) held that Books of account are supported by the purchases vouchers, vouchers for expenses, stock record, and therefore, hypothetical and imaginary calculation of G.P. rate cannot be made unless some specific mistake in the books of account are pointed. In the absence of any specific instances of mistake 19 ITA 192/JP/2020 _ Smt. Ruksana Vs…

315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT v. OM Overseas (320 ITR 116) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax