559 M 13 & C.O. 113 M 18-Ms Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Ltd. (i) Chawla Brothers (P) Limited v. ACIT

43 SOT 651Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#15910 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 127 Section 139 Section 251 Section 106 Section 115BBE Section 118 Section 120 Section 122

Judgments citing 559 M 13 & C.O. 113 M 18-Ms Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Ltd. (i) Chawla Brothers (P) Limited v. ACIT

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. AMRAPALI JEWELS PVT. LTD. , JAIPUR

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

ITA 740/JPR/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 251Section 69B

…king Section 69B 6. Chawla Brothers 6.11.The physical stock inventory taken partly by physical 53- Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT, counting and partly on the basis of details given by the 95 CC 10, Mumbai branches could not be said to be a correct method of taking [2011] 43 SOT 651 physical stock during the survey. Under the circumstances, (Mumbai – Trib.) though the assessee had not disputed inventory physical stock found for Rs. 21.91 crores but certainly the reconciliation furnished by the assessee was required to be considered in the light of the fact that the stock of branches were taken on the basis of statement given…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR vs. PSA CONSTRUCTION, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 145/RPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 250(4)Section 253

…of retraction of admission by the assessee, deletion of addition was held to be justified by the Hon’ble High Court. Ld. CIT(A) has further relied on the decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Chawla Brothers (P) Ltd., reported in [2011] 43 SOT 651 (Mum), wherein it is held that the declaration in survey u/s.133A of the Act is subject to explanation and reconciliation by the assessee and if explained, it has to be considered. 16. On a thoughtful analysis of the factual matrix of the present case, apparently the assessee has provided its books of accounts maintained on computer, however, supp…

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR vs. M/S. VISHNU PRAKASH R PUGALIA, JODHPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Vishnu Prakash R Pugalia, Circle-1, P. No. 22, Subhash Colony, New Jodhpur. Pali Road, Bhagat Ki Kothi, Jodhpur. Pan No. Aadfv 4672 J

…Income-tax officer, [2014] 50 taxmann.com 114 (Chandigarh - Trib.) (ii) CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son [2008] 300 ITR 157 (Mad.) (iii) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1973] 91 ITR 18 (SC). (iv) Chawla Brothers (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 43 SOT 651 (Mum.) (v) Ramakrishnaiah vs. ITO [2010] 39 SOT 379 (HYD.) (vi) Ashok Manilal Thakkar vs ACIT — [2005] 97 ITD 361 (AHD.) He has further submitted that from the evidence and documents submitted during the assessment proceedings it is established that the alleged unaccounted work receipt and unaccounted expenses are duly been recorded in the regular…

SHRI SAYYED HAMID ALI,UJJAIN vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 38/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Sayyed Hamid Ali Acit-2(1) बनाम/ (Prop. Fairdeal Steel) 60-A, Ujjain Vs. Industrial Area Maxi Road, Ujjain (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Acmpa7063M Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Ujjain, (In Short ‘Cit’), Dated 30.11.2016 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 10.03.2015 By Acit- 2(1), Ujjain.

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18(SC) 3. Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT [2003J 263 ITR 101 (Ker.) Hon'ble Kerala High Court 4. Ashok Hanilal Thakkar vs. ACIT-279 ITR 143 (I.T.A.T.-AHM) 5. Chawla Brothers (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (20 43 SOT 651 (Trib. Mum.) 6. CIT vs. Gulmohar Traders 2016 28 ITJ 382 (Trib-Indore). 10. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the following finding of Ld. CIT(A): “Though this ground of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.84,00,000/- on account of excess stock surrendered during the survey proceeding…

DCIT 6(1), MUMBAI vs. AQDAS MARITIME AGENCY P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result these grounds of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 1559/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Asst.Cit, Circle-(6)(1) Mumbai. Ltd. 32/33, Eastern Chamber, 4Th Floor, Nandlal Jani Marg, Vs. Poona Street, Mumbai-400009 Pan:Aaeca8490K (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst.Cit, Circle-(6)(1) M/S Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Mumbai. Ltd. 32/33, Eastern Chamber, 4Th Floor, Nandlal Jani Marg, Vs. Poona Street, Mumbai-400009 Pan:Aaeca8490K (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.113/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year- 2009-10) M/S Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Asst.Cit, Circle-(6)(1) Ltd. 32/33, Eastern Chamber, Mumbai. 4Th Floor, Nandlal Jani Marg, Vs. Poona Street, Mumbai-400009 Pan:Aaeca8490K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mrs. Prakash Jhunjhunwala & Sanjay Jain (Ar) Revenue By : Shri R.P. Meena & Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Set Of Two Appeals By Both The Parties & Cross Objection By Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-

For Appellant: Mrs. Prakash Jhunjhunwala &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena & Rajesh

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

…l 31,37,54,155/- 43,45,38,836/- 49,68,87,145/- 9. In support of his submission the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decision ; ITA No. 4415, 1559 M 13 & C.O. 113 M 18-Ms Aqdas Maritime Agency Pvt. Ltd. (i) Chawla Brothers (P) Limited Vs ACIT 43 SOT 651 (Mum- ITAT) (ii) Virender Kr Aggarwal Vs ITO 3 SOT 843(Jab), (iii) Garima H Jain Vs ACIT 87 ITD 242 (Pune TM) (iv) ITO Vs Dr. KR Jayachandran 70 TTJ 324(Cochin), (v) Agarwal Trading Company Vs ITO 111TTJ 589 (Delhi), (vi) Raj Sons Jewellers Vs ITO 56 TTJ 1106 (Delhi), (vii) CIT Vs Forech India Ltd. 329 ITR 336(Delhi), (viii) Kedarnath Jute Mgf Co.…

A.C.I.T CIR - 30,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SAMAR KUMAR SEN, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 952/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, AR

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…part of the paper book filed before us. Hence the addition cannot be made as an automatic measure. In this regard, we draw support from the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Chawla Brothers (P) Ltd vs ACIT reported in (2011) 43 SOT 651 (Mumbai Tribunal) dated 4.5.2010 , wherein it was held that :- “Section 133A, read with section 69, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Survey - Assessment year 2005-06 - Whether reports and facts collected at time of survey are always subject to explanation and reconciliation by assessee which can be explained either at time of surveyor after survey be…