322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT v. Ashwani Gupta

306 ITR 27High Court2008#1288 most cited

What is 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT v. Ashwani Gupta authority for?

Statements recorded under Section 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, have no independent evidentiary value and therefore cannot be relied upon to draw any adverse opinion during assessment proceedings.

88

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta · 322 ITR 396 · Section 131 · evidentiary value · statements recorded · adverse opinion · Section 153A · assessment proceedings · Delhi High Court · Income Tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69CSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 153CSection 10A

Issues it is cited on

section 115adsection 2(1a)section 2(1)section 66section 153a proceedingssection 60section 63section 2(14)(iii)peak credit theorysection 65section 115aaudi alteram partem

Judgments citing 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT v. Ashwani Gupta

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 425/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 424/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 423/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 422/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 421/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 420/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 418/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

ITA 417/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271(1)(c)

…lawful opportunity of rebuttal deserves to be deleted. Refer 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. 6 ITA.Nos.413 to 418/Del./2017 & ITA.Nos.420 to 425/Del./2017 Smt. Sneh Lata Sawhney, New Delhi. CIT, 295 ITR 105 (DEL) CIT Vs. Dharm Pal Prem Chand Ltd, 306 ITR 27 (DEL) CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar. 3.3. That the addition of alleged peak balance of Rs.9,18,54,176/- on protective basis is liable to be deleted as the same has not been shown to be credited during the AY 2006-07. Aspect of opening balance has not been considered. Refer 301 ITR 404 (Raj) CIT vs Parmeshwar Bohra. 3.4. That the said addition as made of Rs…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir.-3, Surat vs. Sh. Hareshbhai Mohanbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 48/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No.01/Srt/2021 (Ay 2010-11) It(Ss)A No.09/Srt/2020 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Dineshchandra D Income-Tax, Central Circle- Koradia, 3Room No.507, 5Th Floor, 9/10, Dayanand Society, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura B/H.Navyug College, Gate, Surat-395001 Rander Road, Surat Pan No: Acupk 3696 A Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153CSection 158BSection 254(1)

…for purchasing flat and entire addition is based on presumption and without any evidence. The assessee also relied on certain case law.  CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal [2016] 70 taxmann.com 95 (Del)  CIT vs. SMC Broker Ltd. 288 ITR 345 (Del)  CIT vs. Rajeshkumar 306 ITR 27 (Del)  Heir And Legal Representatives of Lt. Laxmanbhai S Patel vs. CIT 327 ITR 290 (Guj)  PCIT, Ahmedabad vs. Kanubhai M Patel [2017] 79 taxmann.com 257 (Guj)  Jai Karan Sharma vs. DCIT [2012] 23 taxmann.com 300 (Del) 24. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee held that a search operation was carried out on 04.04.2014 in t…

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…T vs. S.M. Aggarwal 293 ITR 43 (Del). 5. CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. 295 ITR 105 (Del). 6. CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta 303 ITR 95 (Del) 7. CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 (Del) 8. CIT v Sunil Aggarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 9. Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT 382 ITR 639 (Del) 10. Ms. Farrah Marker vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA.No.3801/Mum/20111 dated 27.04.2016. 11. Ms. Malti Ghan Shyambhai Patadia vs. ITO ITA.No.3400/Ahd/2015 dated 06.02.2017. 12. M/s Rainbow International (P) Ltd vs. ITO ITA.No.3104/DeI/2013 dated 10.05.2016. 7.4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referring to the following decisions submitted th…

M/S. Kasturi Rashi Developers, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 5(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1961/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

…ourt/Tribunal should not interfere with the order of punishment by mechanically setting-aside the order of punishment on the ground that the report was not furnished. 29. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Roger Enterprises P. Ltd. & Anr VS. CIT & Anr (2016) 382 ITR 639 (Del) has held that where uncontroverted statement of witness was sufficient to substantiate the case of the Revenue, the assessee cannot take the plea of violation of principles of nature justice. This judgment was rendered after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise,…

ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi vs. Jpm Tools Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 7281/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi vs. Jpm Tools Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 7280/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Jjf Casting Ltd (Formerly Known As Jpm Renewable Energy Ltd), Delhi

ITA 7278/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Jay Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6639/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, CC- 13, New Delhi vs. Jay Ace Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6638/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi vs. Jay Nikki Industries Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6635/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Jay Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6630/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Jay Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6629/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Jay Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6628/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirmed in 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd. g) [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal h) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta i) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem chand Ltd. j) 306 ITR 27 (Del) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar k) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta l) 315 ITR 265 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Jindal Vegetables Products Limited 13. It is further submitted that the entire assessment order is merely copy and paste of observations of the Investigation wing in the appraisal report. Thus, reliance is placed on the following judgments o…