77 ITR 533 (SC); S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar v. CIT (33 ITR 13)

ARBUDA TEXTILE MILL,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1906/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

…physical verification of the stock on yearly basis was undertaken and was reflected in the balance sheet of the Assessee. In a large number of decisions, including Pandit Bros v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 159 (Punj. & Har.), Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1958] 33 ITR 13 (Bom.) and S. Veeriah Reddiar v. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 152 (Ker.), it has been held that the mere non- maintenance of stock register would not lead to the conclusion that profit of the Assessee could not be determined on the basis of the books of accounts maintained by it. 12. In the case of Fine Switchgears vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax [2…

AJAY SHARMA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-44(6), DELHI

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

ITA 2504/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

…rejected the books of account of the appellant u/s 145(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also quoted the following judgments in support of his action: (S N Namashivayam Chettiyar vs. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 579 (SC); Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd., vs. CIT (1958) 33 ITR 13 (Bombay); . CIT Vs Pareck Brothers (Patna) 167 ITR 344; Ratanlal Omprakash Vs CIT (Ori) 132 ITR 640) The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Amiya Kumar Roy and Brothers v/s. CIT (1994) 206 ITR 306 Vikas W.S.P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hissar [2009] 177 TAXMAN 142 (PUNJ. & HAR.). 7 Therefore, the Assessing Officer calculated the…

M/S. DEEPALI DESIGNS AND EXHIBITS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1827/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 36

…sale could not be presumed in absence of any evidence of sale of scrap outside books. Hence, the order is non-speaking order. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:— (i) Pandit Bros. v. CIT 26 ITR 159 (Puni.) (ii) Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. v. CIT 33 ITR 13 (Bom.) (iii) R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wvg. Mills v. CIT 75 ITR 260 (Bom.) (iv) International Forest Co. v. CIT 101 ITR 721 (J&K); (v) Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (Raj.) 19. 32. The Ld. AR submitted that on one hand he has accepted the books of 28 accounts and on the other hand he has made additions on estimated basi…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DEEPALI DESIGN & EXHIBITS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1710/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 36

…sale could not be presumed in absence of any evidence of sale of scrap outside books. Hence, the order is non-speaking order. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:— (i) Pandit Bros. v. CIT 26 ITR 159 (Puni.) (ii) Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. v. CIT 33 ITR 13 (Bom.) (iii) R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wvg. Mills v. CIT 75 ITR 260 (Bom.) (iv) International Forest Co. v. CIT 101 ITR 721 (J&K); (v) Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (Raj.) 19. 32. The Ld. AR submitted that on one hand he has accepted the books of 28 accounts and on the other hand he has made additions on estimated basi…

M/S SUBASH CHANDER AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 739/ASR/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Oct 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 738 & 739/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Deb (D.R.)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…pipe business, relying on the decisions in, inter alia, CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.[1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC); Investment Ltd. v. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 533 (SC); S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar v. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 579 (SC); Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1958] 33 ITR 13 (Bom); Ghanshyamdas Permanand v. CIT [1952] 21 ITR 79 (Nag.); and Ratanlal Omprakash v. CIT [1981] 132 ITR (AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11) Subhash Chander Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT 640 (Ori). – also noting their ratio, and made an addition for Rs. 5 lacs and Rs. 4.5 lacs (for each of the two years under reference respectively) to the declared gross profit,…

M/S. SBASH CHANDER AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 738/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 738 & 739/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Deb (D.R.)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…pipe business, relying on the decisions in, inter alia, CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.[1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC); Investment Ltd. v. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 533 (SC); S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar v. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 579 (SC); Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1958] 33 ITR 13 (Bom); Ghanshyamdas Permanand v. CIT [1952] 21 ITR 79 (Nag.); and Ratanlal Omprakash v. CIT [1981] 132 ITR (AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11) Subhash Chander Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT 640 (Ori). – also noting their ratio, and made an addition for Rs. 5 lacs and Rs. 4.5 lacs (for each of the two years under reference respectively) to the declared gross profit,…

M/S MARUTI UDYOG LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL

ITA/31/2005HC Delhi07 Dec 2017

Bench: 31St March 2000, I.E. The End Of The Relevant Accounting Year, Even Though The Assessee Has Already Incurred Liability Of Excise Duty Of Rs.12.27 Crores?

Section 260ASection 43B

…ck on yearly basis was undertaken and was reflected in the balance sheet of the Assessee. In a large ITA No.31/2005 Page 38 of 41 number of decisions, including Pandit Bros. v. CIT (1954)26 ITR 159 (P&H), Bombay Cycle Stores Co. Ltd v. CIT (1958) 33 ITR 13 (Bom) and Veeriah Reddiar (S) v. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 152 (Ker), it has been held that the mere non- maintenance of stock register would not lead to the conclusion that profit of the Assessee could not be determined on the basis of the books of accounts maintained by it. 74. For all of the aforementioned reasons, the Court answers Questions (…

77 ITR 533 (SC); S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar v. CIT

Sections most often in play

Judgments citing 77 ITR 533 (SC); S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar v. CIT