ACIT v. Juiter Distillery

42 SOT 48Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#20823 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Juiter Distillery

Khodiyar Organisers, Surat vs. ACIT, Circle-2(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.36/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S Khodiyar Organisers, Vs. Acit, Central Plaza, Near Om Terrace, Circle – 2(3), New City Light Road, Surat – Surat 395007, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aakfk1498A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…aj Jindal, 79 taxmann.com 96 (Del.), CIT vs. Sas Pharmaceuticals, 11 taxmann.com 207 (Del.), CIT vs. Vega auto Accessories (P.) Ltd., 26 taxmann.com 335 (Kar.), DCIT vs. Milestone Developers, ITA No.2961/Ahd/2016 (Surat – Trib.), DCIT vs. Dr. Satish B. Gupta, 42 SOT 48 (Ahd – Trib.), ACIT vs. Jupiter Distrillery, 23 taxmann.com 303 (Ahd – Trib.), Harikrishna Silk Mills vs. ACIT, 107 Taxman 78 (Ahd – Trib.), DCIT vs. NBM Iron & Steel Trading Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 205/Ahd/2022 (Ahd – Trib.), R. Umedbhai Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT(OSD), ITA No.221/Ahd/2015 (Ahd – Trib.), Vipul Life Sciences Ltd. vs. DCIT, 57 taxmann.…

The DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad vs. Yamunaji Corporation, Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3308/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.3307/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Cent.Cir.2(2) Vs. Mann Corporation Ahmedabad. Mala Hills, Aarya Manan Shop B/H. Anand Party Plot Road Gst Crossing, Ranip, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabfa 6682 K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AR with Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…he assessee, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the following orders/judgments: i) Divya Sthapatya Vs. ITO, ITA No.2220 & 221/Ahd/2015 dated 20-2-2018; ii) ACIT Vs. Juiter Distillery, 23 taxmann.com 303 (Ahd- Trib.); iii) DCIT Vs. Dr.Satish B. Gupta, 42 SOT 48 (Ahd); iv) CIT Vs. SAS Pharmacetuticals, 11 taxmann.com 207 (Del); v) Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 79 taxmann.com 96 (Del) ITA No.3307 and 3308/Ahd/2016 4 4. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. Undisputed facts of the case is that survey under section 133A was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 28.3…

The DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad vs. Mann Corporation, Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3307/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.3307/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Cent.Cir.2(2) Vs. Mann Corporation Ahmedabad. Mala Hills, Aarya Manan Shop B/H. Anand Party Plot Road Gst Crossing, Ranip, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabfa 6682 K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AR with Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…he assessee, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the following orders/judgments: i) Divya Sthapatya Vs. ITO, ITA No.2220 & 221/Ahd/2015 dated 20-2-2018; ii) ACIT Vs. Juiter Distillery, 23 taxmann.com 303 (Ahd- Trib.); iii) DCIT Vs. Dr.Satish B. Gupta, 42 SOT 48 (Ahd); iv) CIT Vs. SAS Pharmacetuticals, 11 taxmann.com 207 (Del); v) Pr.CIT Vs. Neeraj Jindal, 79 taxmann.com 96 (Del) ITA No.3307 and 3308/Ahd/2016 4 4. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. Undisputed facts of the case is that survey under section 133A was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 28.3…

DCIT, Tirunelveli vs. M.Lazar Adaikalam, Tirunelveli

In the result , the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2753/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. B. Nischal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. G. Gopalan, JCIT (Retd)
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…voluntary and also furnished details about his business transaction and concluded that the survey operations does not warrant for levy of penalty further relied on the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘C’ bench in DCIT vs. Dr. Satish B. Gupta 42 SOT 48 wherein it was held as under:- The initial phrase used in section 271(1)(c) suggests that Assessing Officer has to find in the course of any proceedings under this Act that assessee has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. In fact the proceedings against the assessee would start only after ret…

ACIT v. Juiter Distillery (42 SOT 48) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax