How many judgments cite ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd.?

11 judgments on BharatTax cite ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (142 ITD 118), spanning 2017 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 32(1)(ii), Section 38(2).

ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd.

142 ITD 118Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#9976 most cited

What is ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. authority for?

Where an Assessing Officer (AO) seeks to reject an assessee's book results and make an assessment based on best judgment, they must first identify specific defects in the books of account and seek an explanation from the assessee. If the assessee fails to explain these defects, the AO may then compute income by estimation. Ad hoc disallowances are not justified if no defects in the books are pointed out.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. · 142 ITD 118 · ITAT · assessment procedure · rejection of books of account · best judgment assessment · ad hoc disallowance · defects in accounts · mercantile system of accounting

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 32(1)(ii)Section 38(2)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd.

Subharti Media Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Meerut

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 1715/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2693/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Acit Subharti Media Ltd., Central Circle, Vs. Subhartipuram, Nh-58, Meerut. Delhi Haridwar Byepass Road, Meerut.

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 153CSection 68

…the books were not rejected and, therefore, there is no justification for making ad hoc disallowance. 23. We further observe that the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (154 TTJ 1), wherein the coordinate bench held that when the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting and maintaining books of account the AO can reject the book results and assessed the income to his estimate or best judgment. The AO is required to point out the defects in the 17 I.T.A.Nos.2693/Del/2016 & 1715/Del/2018 accounts of the assess…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S Subharti Media Ltd., Meerut

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 2693/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 153CSection 68

Ram Ratan Jangir, Amer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(2), Jaipur

In the result ground no. 1 raised by the

ITA 550/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Anoop Bhatiya, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…to support his contentions: - (i) Kailash Chand Gupta Vs. DCIT 35 Tax world 36 (Jaipur ITAT) It has been held that depreciation is a statutory provision and on account of personal use, no disallowance can be made. (ii) ACIT Vs Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 118 (Delhi)(Trib). (iii) CIT Vs Oracle India (P) Ltd. 199 Taxman 181 (Del)(HC)(Mag). (iv) Arthur & Anderson & Co. Vs. ACIT 2010-TIOL-416-ITAT- Mum. 12 (v) Seasons Catering Services (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 43 DTR 397 (Del)(Trib). (vi) DCIT Vs M/s Art Asia It has been held in all the cases that without pointing out any specific de As regards disallowance o…

Manoj Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-62(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 978/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 143(3)

…ic discrepancy or absence of bills or voucher and, therefore in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Friends Clearing Agency Private Limited Vs CIT, 332 ITR 269 and decision of Tribunal in the case of Ganapathi Enterprises Ltd., 142 ITD 118, no ad-hoc disallowance could be sustained. 4.3 The Learned DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of the lower authorities. 4 ITA No.978/Del./2018 4.4 We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Friends Clearing A…

DCIT, Circle, Sriganganagar vs. M/S. Kanda Edible Oil P. Ltd., Sriganganagar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 191/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwald.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Kanda Edible Oil Pvt. Ltd. Circle, E 173, Udyog Vihar Sriganganagar. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aacck 7754 Q

Section 36(1)(iii)

…nses are uncalled for. It was further submitted that in case of company, no disallowance on account of personal use of vehicle and car can be made. For this purpose reliance has been placed on the following cases:- i. ACIT Vs. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 118 (Delhi) (Trib.) ii. CIT Vs. Oracle India (P) Ltd. 199 Taxman 181 (Del) (HC) iii. Arthur & Anderson & Co. Vs. ACIT (2010- TIOL-416-ITAT) iv. Seasons Catering Services (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 43 DTR 397 (Del) (Trib) v. Metallizing Equipment Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 70 TTJ 365 (Jodh.) vi CIT Vs. Dinesh Mills Ltd. 148 Taxman 76 (Guj.) vii Surya Credits Ltd.…

DCIT, Circle, Sriganganagar vs. M/S. Kanda Edible Oil P. Ltd., Sriganganagar

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

ITA 190/JODH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwald.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Kanda Edible Oil Pvt. Ltd. Circle, E 173, Udyog Vihar Sriganganagar. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aacck 7754 Q

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(b)

…nses are uncalled for. It was further submitted that in case of company, no disallowance on account of personal use of vehicle and car can be made. For this purpose reliance has been placed on the following cases:- i. ACIT Vs. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 118 (Delhi) (Trib.) ii. CIT Vs. Oracle India (P) Ltd. 199 Taxman 181 (Del) (HC) iii. Arthur & Anderson & Co. Vs. ACIT (2010- TIOL-416-ITAT) iv. Seasons Catering Services (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 43 DTR 397 (Del) (Trib) v. Metallizing Equipment Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 70 TTJ 365 (Jodh.) vi. CIT Vs. Dinesh Mills Ltd. 148 Taxman 76 (Guj.) vii. Surya Credits Ltd…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mercurius Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and Cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6704/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh.R. K. Panda & Sh.Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 Ito M/S. Mercurius Advisory Ward – 16 (4) Vs Services Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 304 C-7/227, Sector-7, C. R. Building, I. P Estate Rohini New Delhi New Delhi -110085 Aafcm5179C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133Section 30Section 37

…e the CIT(A) and it was not the case of Assessing Officer that the confirmations furnished by the agents were false, the CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the disallowance made by Assessing Officer. (A.Y. 2009-10) Fashion Suitings (P) Ltd. v. JCIT (2013) 154 TTJ 1 / 86 DTR 49 (Jodh.)(Trib.) On the basis of above discussion and judicial pronouncement, appellant's appeal on this ground stands allowed.” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT (A) the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival arguments made by the both the sides and pursued the orders of the authorities below. We fin…

Shivalik Kinema Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 400/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…24 M/s Shivalik Kinema Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur expenditure which are required to be incurred even if no business is carried out during the year. In support, reliance was placed on the following cases:- • ACIT vs. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. (2013) 142 ITD 118 (Delhi)(Trib.) • CIT vs. Oracle India (P) Ltd. 199 Taxman 181 (Del) (HC) (Mag.) • Seasons Catering Services (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT 43 DTR 397 (Del) (Trib) 26. We find that it is a case of adhoc disallowance of expenses which is not permissible in the eye of law. No finding has been given by the lower authorities that these are bogus expenditure or the…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Madanlal Forge Pvt. Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 330/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 09.11.2017

…e claim were not furnished by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). On appeal, Ld.CIT(A) admitted that PAN details and the relevant ledger extracts in support of its claim on 3 (142 ITD 118), the above said two disallowances made by the ld. Assessing Officer were deleted. Against the order of Ld.CIT(A), now the Revenue is in appeal before us. 4. Before us, the ld.D.R submitted that the documents produced first time before the Ld.CIT(A) are not confronted to the ld. Assessing Officer and Ld.CIT(A) decided without calling of Rema…

M/S. Bio Med Private Limited, Ghaziabad vs. Addl.CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6827/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Bio-Med Private Ltd Vs. The Addl. CIT C- 96, Site No. 1, B.S. Road Range - 2 Industrial Area Ghaziabad Ghaziabad PAN : AABCB 3477 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 09.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2017 Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.09.2014 passed b…

Data Infosys Limited, Alwar vs. DCIT, Alwar

In the result, revenue’s ground no

ITA 58/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 May 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.A.Verma (Addl. CIT)

Section 10ASection 35D

…r details, bills and vouchers. No specific defect is pointed out in the expenses incurred by the assessee either by AO or by the CIT(A). The adhoc disallowance, without basis, is unjustified as held in the following cases:- - ACIT Vs. Ganpati Enterprises Ltd. 142 ITD 118 (Delhi)(Trib.) - CIT Vs. Oracle India (P) Ltd. 199 Taxman 181 (Del) (HC) (Mag.) - Arthur & Anderson & Co. Vs. ACIT 2010-TIOL-416-ITAT-Mum. - Seasons Catering Services (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 43 DTR 397 (Del) (Trib). 3.2 The ld DR is heard who has relied on the order of the lower authorities. 3.3 We have heard the rival contentions and pursued the mat…