8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT

96 ITR 97High Court1974#2356 most cited

What is 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT authority for?

The elementary principle of natural justice requires that an assessee must have knowledge of all material intended to be used against them in assessment proceedings, along with a reasonable opportunity to meet or rebut such material, including the right to cross-examine witnesses.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT · 96 ITR 97 · natural justice · audi alteram partem · opportunity to be heard · right to cross-examine · material used against assessee · violation of natural justice · assessment proceedings · Section 142(3) · Section 133(6)

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 1961Section 271AABSection 69Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

arbitrary and capricioussection 132(1)(a)section 142(3)section 106third party informationsection 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 114section 158bdmliaudi alteram partemretracted statement

Judgments citing 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(8), Surat vs. Shri Rajesh Kumar Pamecha, Ajmer

In the result the ground No

ITA 87/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…713 — International Forest v/s CIT 101 ITR 721 ITO v/s Ponkunnam 102 ITR 336 Narayan v/s CIT 20 ITR 287 ; in ITR 361; Nagulokonda v/s CIT 31 ITR 781; Thomakutty v/s CIT 34 ITR 501 Koyanmankutty v/s ITO 58 ITR 871 ; Radheylal v/s CIT 4 ITC 454 ; Gargi v/s CIT 96 ITR 97; Hirji v/s CIT 105 ITR 286 (sec 271). However, quashing reopening and assessment on this ground would mean that the appellant is given undue benefit of mistakes by an individual officer. This is neither fair nor equitable for the revenue. Hence, this ground is not allowed. 13. On merits, Ld. CIT(A) held as follows: “7.2 Ground regarding disallowanc…

ACIT Cent Cir 2(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Amish A Modi, Mumbai

ITA 1570/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1311, 1312 & 1468/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 & ITA Nos.2437& 2436/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Amish Anantrai Modi, Dy. Commissioner of 404, Jyoti Tower, Income Tax, S.V. Road, Central Circle-2(1), Room No.804, 8th Floor, Opp. Anandavan Ashram, Vs. Kandivali West, Pratishtha Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 0067 Old CGO Annex, PAN: AFXPM2914F M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1357 & 1570/M/2021 Ass…

Amish Anantrai Modi, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 1468/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1311, 1312 & 1468/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 & ITA Nos.2437& 2436/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Amish Anantrai Modi, Dy. Commissioner of 404, Jyoti Tower, Income Tax, S.V. Road, Central Circle-2(1), Room No.804, 8th Floor, Opp. Anandavan Ashram, Vs. Kandivali West, Pratishtha Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 0067 Old CGO Annex, PAN: AFXPM2914F M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1357 & 1570/M/2021 Ass…

Asstt. CIT, Central Cir-2(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Amish A Modi, Mumbai

ITA 1357/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1311, 1312 & 1468/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 & ITA Nos.2437& 2436/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Amish Anantrai Modi, Dy. Commissioner of 404, Jyoti Tower, Income Tax, S.V. Road, Central Circle-2(1), Room No.804, 8th Floor, Opp. Anandavan Ashram, Vs. Kandivali West, Pratishtha Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 0067 Old CGO Annex, PAN: AFXPM2914F M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1357 & 1570/M/2021 Ass…

Amish Anantrai Modi, Mumbai vs. Dy Cti-CC-2(1), Mumbai

ITA 1312/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1311, 1312 & 1468/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 & ITA Nos.2437& 2436/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Amish Anantrai Modi, Dy. Commissioner of 404, Jyoti Tower, Income Tax, S.V. Road, Central Circle-2(1), Room No.804, 8th Floor, Opp. Anandavan Ashram, Vs. Kandivali West, Pratishtha Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 0067 Old CGO Annex, PAN: AFXPM2914F M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1357 & 1570/M/2021 Ass…

Amish Anantrai Modi, Mumbai vs. Dy Cti-CC-2(1), Mumbai

ITA 1311/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1311, 1312 & 1468/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 & ITA Nos.2437& 2436/M/2021 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Amish Anantrai Modi, Dy. Commissioner of 404, Jyoti Tower, Income Tax, S.V. Road, Central Circle-2(1), Room No.804, 8th Floor, Opp. Anandavan Ashram, Vs. Kandivali West, Pratishtha Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 0067 Old CGO Annex, PAN: AFXPM2914F M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1357 & 1570/M/2021 Ass…

M/So. Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 104/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 37Section 40Section 43C

…es of equity and justice. No addition could have been made without providing adequate opportunity to the assesse. The following case laws are quoted in support: - 11 M/s Columbus Overseas LLP, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur (i) Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All.). Principles of natural justice are applicable - The principles of natural justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material which is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it – (ii) Tin Box Co. v. CIT [2001] 116 Taxman…

Shri.B.H.Basha, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1375/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Roumvan Paite, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 69Section 69A

…by the revenue on the spur of the moment, that should not be treated as an effective opportunity given to the assessee. In that case the Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All) wherein it was held that permission to cross-examine witness given, but names of the witnesses and substance of the statement made by them not given is not a proper opportunity and on that ground assessment was vitiated by the principles of natural justice as permission to cross-examine all ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 Page 12 of 44 the wit…

Pawan Kumar Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 202/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…because of which the assessee was adversely affected. Similar is the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in H.R.Mehta V/s ACIT (387 ITR 561). As a matter of fact, the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Gargi Devi Jwala Prasad V/s CIT (1974 96 ITR 97) as referred to by Ld. CIT(A), also support the proposition that the principles of natural justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material that is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it. 6.7 The Ld. CIT-DR has submitted t…

Manish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 201/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…because of which the assessee was adversely affected. Similar is the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in H.R.Mehta V/s ACIT (387 ITR 561). As a matter of fact, the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Gargi Devi Jwala Prasad V/s CIT (1974 96 ITR 97) as referred to by Ld. CIT(A), also support the proposition that the principles of natural justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material that is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it. 6.7 The Ld. CIT-DR has submitted t…

Manish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 200/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…because of which the assessee was adversely affected. Similar is the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in H.R.Mehta V/s ACIT (387 ITR 561). As a matter of fact, the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Gargi Devi Jwala Prasad V/s CIT (1974 96 ITR 97) as referred to by Ld. CIT(A), also support the proposition that the principles of natural justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material that is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it. 6.7 The Ld. CIT-DR has submitted t…

Ashish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 199/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…because of which the assessee was adversely affected. Similar is the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in H.R.Mehta V/s ACIT (387 ITR 561). As a matter of fact, the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Gargi Devi Jwala Prasad V/s CIT (1974 96 ITR 97) as referred to by Ld. CIT(A), also support the proposition that the principles of natural justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material that is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it. 6.7 The Ld. CIT-DR has submitted t…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 506/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 505/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 504/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 503/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 502/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 501/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 500/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 37

…cross-examine is not restricted only to those cases where the deponent / witness is a third party, reliance is placed on the decision of Smt. Madhu Gupta v. DCIT 2006 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI / [2006] 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 (All). ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 59 of 183 100. In the case of Nagulakonda Venkata Subba Rao (supra) almost the same proposition was accepted by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Hon’ble High Court held that while estimating the income from other materials, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to disclose such materials to the…

Amit H Patel (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC 3((4), Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 5762/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harith, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…t made by such persons during; such examination may thereafter be used in evidence in any proceeding under the Act." 5.6 Further, proceedings before the Income-tax authorities, as explained by the Allahabad High Court in Gargi Devi Jwala Prasad v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 97 , are considered to be of judicial nature where the issues are decided on the basis of evidences which can be oral or documentary. Oral evidences, inter alia, include Amit H. Patel (HUF) statements which are made before the income-tax authority in relation to matter of inquiry and may include examination of the assessee itself. Also, the statement…