How many judgments cite Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co.?

321 judgments on BharatTax cite Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co. (67 ITR 11), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 40(a)(i), Section 147, Section 35D, Section 80HHC.

Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co.

67 ITR 11Supreme Court of India1968#233 most cited

What is Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co. authority for?

A taxpayer can legitimately arrange their commercial affairs to reduce tax liability, as permissible tax planning differs from tax evasion. Only real income is subject to tax, not hypothetical or notional income imputed by the Assessing Officer.

321

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. A. Raman & Co. · 67 ITR 11 · tax planning vs tax evasion · real income doctrine · notional income · hypothetical income · arranging commercial affairs · Section 143(3) · Section 148 · legitimate tax reduction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 40(a)(i)Section 147 Section 35D Section 80HHC Section 28(iiid)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 153b(i)(a)section 132(8)section 132(9a)section 153(1)(a)section 145a valuation of shares section 65b section 65 section 153(1)icds dumb documents section 153b

Judgments citing Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co.

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. SUDHARSHNA ARORA, NEW DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1185/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2026AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarita No.1185 /Del./2010, A.Y. 2004-05 Ito, Vs Smt. Sudharshna Arora Ward-24(4), . B-6/9, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaepa8154H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1185 /Del./2010, A.Y. 2004-05 ITO, Vs Smt. Sudharshna Arora Ward-24(4), . B-6/9, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAEPA8154H (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.157/Del/2016 (in ITA No.1185/Del/2016) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Smt. Sudharshna Arora Vs. ITO, B-6/9, Vasant Vihar, Ward-24(4), New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAEPA8154H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vinod Gupta, CA Revenue by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08/01/20…

M/S JHS SVENDGAARD LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3454/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S Jhs Svendgaard Vs. Dcit Laboratories Ltd. B1/E-23, Central Circle-31, New Mohan Cooperative Delhi Tuhglakabad, Badarpur, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcj5766G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv & Sh. Tarun Chanana, Adv Revenue By Ms.Amisha S. Gupt, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 37

…1 M/S JHS Sevendgaard Laborotories Ltd. Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s JHS Svendgaard Vs. DCIT Laboratories Ltd. B1/E-23, Central Circle-31, New Mohan Cooperative Delhi Tuhglakabad, Badarpur, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AABCJ5766G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv and Sh. Tarun Chanana, Adv Revenue by Ms.Amisha S. Gupt, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 07/01/2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is file…

INSTAKART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 544/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate and Ms. AnkitaFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT

…been earned or disallow real expenses merely because the business has . ITA No.330,331,496,543 &544/Bang/2024 S.A No.25/Bang/2025 Page 16 of 46 resulted in losses. Reliance was placed on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in CIT v. A. Raman & Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11, which held that only real income can be taxed, and not hypothetical or notional income that could have been earned. Similar support was drawn from decisions in Highways Construction Co. (P) Ltd. and VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., where ad-hoc disallowance of business losses without specific defects was struck down. 11.3 It was also argued that the d…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

…ooks and making a Best Judgment Assessment. Thus, on facts the view taken by the Tribunal is possible view. Therefore, no substantial question of law arises. Thus not entertained. 17. The Supreme Court has observed in the case of CIT v. A. Raman & Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11 that the law does not oblige a trader to make maximum profit, he can make, out of his trading activity. Income on which he can be taxed is only the income he has earned. So also recently, the Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders v. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 74/288 ITR 1 has observed that no businessman can be compelled to maximize his profits. Th…

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

M/S ROBUST TRANSPORTATION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4803/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

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

…rovision and that, in the absence of a contractual right to receive interest, there was no accrual of interest income. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (46 ITR 144) and CIT v. A. Raman & Co. (67 ITR 11) for the proposition that only real income can be subjected to tax and that hypothetical or notional income cannot be taxed merely on the ground that, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the assessee could have earned it. 6 Robust Transportation Pvt. Ltd., 8. As regards the notices issued under section 133(6) to the recipient companies, the a…

DCIT CIRCLE 61(1), DELHI vs. SUKHBIR SINGH CHABRA HUF, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 315/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.315/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 बनाम Dcit, Sukhbir Singh Chabra Huf Circle 61(1), Vs. 6, Rani Jhansi Road, Delhi. Motia Khan, Delhi. Pan No.Aaahs5683P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 44ASection 92C

…from the perspective of tax planning. This is different from tax evasion. The law provides the tax payer to adopt such methods to reduce his tax burden. It is treated as legitimate and bona-fide. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Raman & Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC) has laid down that a tax-payer can reduce his liability, by so arranging his commercial affairs that charge of tax is distributed. From the facts of the case, the transaction including the arrangement of facts of the related party entity with the mother company points to a well designed method of tax-planning. The appellant is within his right…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI PUNJAB vs. TAJ LAND DEVELOPEFRS AND PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECTOR MOHALI PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: \nShri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ich reassessment notice was issued were not found to\nexist, and the moment such is the position, the ITO does not get the jurisdiction\nto make a reassessment. This view of ours finds support from the Supreme Court\ndecisions in CIT vs. A. Raman & Co. (1968) 67 ITR 11 (SC) and Bankipur Club\nLtd, vs. CIT 1972 CTR (SC) 245 : (1971) 82 ITR 831 (SC). Similar view has been\ntaken by the Rajasthan High Court in Addl. CIT vs. Ganeshilal Lal Chand (1984)\n43 CTR (Rai) 120 : (1985) 154 ITR 274 (Raj)., On behalf of the Revenue, CIT\nvs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. 1976 CTR (Gui)\n214 : (1977) 106…

ITO 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DEEPIKA ANIL AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

ITA 1885/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 147Section 263Section 68

…iven an adequate\nopportunity of explaining it.\nSuspicious cannot take place the evidence\n1. DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil, (Mum) (Trib) (ITA No. 6727/M/2012\ndt.20/8/2014\n2. K.P. Varghese v. ITO, (1981) 131 ITR 579 (SC);\n3. CIT v. Roman & Co., (1968) : 67 ITR 11 (SC);\n4. CIT v. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.', (1973) 91 ITR 8 (SC);\n5. Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT', (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC\nIncome assessed without evidence is bad-in-law.\nIncome assessed by revenue without supporting material is not justified.\n1. CIT V. BHUVANENDRA 303 ITR 235 (MAD.)\n2. VINOD SOLANKI VS. UOI (233) ELT 157 (S.C.)\n3. CIT V. KA…

RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1000/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 263Section 68Section 69A

…ning it. Suspicious cannot take place the evidence 1. DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil, (Mum) (Trib) (ITA No. 6727/M/2012 dt.20/8/2014 29 Rajendra Kumar Mundra (HUF)., Mumbai. 2. K.P. Varghese v. ITO, (1981) 131 ITR 579 (SC); 3. CIT v. Roman & Co., (1968) : 67 ITR 11 (SC); 4. CIT v. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.', (1973) 91 ITR 8 (SC); 5. Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT', (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Income assessed without evidence is bad-in-law. Income assessed by revenue without supporting material is not justified. 1. CIT V. BHUVANENDRA 303 ITR 235 (MAD.) 2. VINOD SOLANKI VS. UOI (233) ELT 157 (S.C.) 3. CIT V. KASHIRA…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR, HIGHCOURT CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. LATE VANDANA AGARWAL THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. NISHIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 1237/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…of the appellant of not generating interest income when alternative opportunity was available which is not within the scope of his discharge of duty as an AO. In this regard the appellant has placed reliance on two case laws namely, CIT v/sA.Raman& Co. (1968) 67 ITR 11 (SC) and India Finance & Construction Co. (P) Ltd. v/s DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Bom.). 17. With respect to the observation of the AO as to why new bank account was required to be opened in IDBI Bank, the appellant has stated that extensive queries were made by the Investigation Wing about the nature/ source of their deposits and a detailed reply a…

HARSH COMTRADE PVT LTD,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 225/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.225/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Harsh Comtrade Private Limited, Vs Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 1/A, Stuti Apartment, Near Ashok Panhouse, City Light, Surat, Gujarat Pan No. :Aabcg 8847 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.12.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059161646(1) For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Shri Mehul Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Submitted That He Has Filed Written Submissions Before The Tribunal Which Has Been Placed In The Paper Book At Pages 90 To 104 Which Reads As Follows :- Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata - 'Smc' Bench In The Case Of Harsh Comtrade Pvt. Ltd Sub: Written Submission For A.Y. 2012-13 Ref: Assessee'S Appeal No. 225/Kol/2024 Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2024 May It Please To Your Honour 1. In This Case, The Case Is Re-Opened On The Basis Of Reasons For Reopening Recorded On 23.03.2018. The Same Is Reproduced

For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR

Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.225/KOL/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Harsh Comtrade Private Limited, Vs ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 1/A, Stuti Apartment, Near Ashok Panhouse, City Light, Surat, Gujarat PAN No. :AABCG 8847 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Mehul Shah, AR नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Section 148BSection 151

…expression 'information' in the context in which\nit occurs must, mean instruction or knowledge derived from an\nexternal source concerning facts or particulars, or as to law relating to\na matter bearing on the assessment vide: CIT v. A. RAMAN & CO.\n[1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC)]. Therefore, section 148 would point out to\nconcrete information which could be facts which point out to a case\nof income having escaped assessment. [Para D(b)]\nOn a conjoint reading of section 147 and section 148, it is clear\nthat the escapement of income is a sine qua non for initiating\nproceedings under section 147. Therefore, availabi…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2019-20

Section 148BSection 151

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Section 148BSection 151

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Section 148BSection 151

AKSHAY KUMAR RUNGTA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

ITA 66/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 153Section 153CSection 250

…sment. In our opinion, an error discovered on a reconsideration of the same material (and no more) does not give him that power. That was the view taken by this court in Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC)(SC), CIT v. A. Raman and Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC) and Bankipur Club Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 831 (SC), and we do not believe that the law has since taken a different course. Any observations in Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law." 35. In A. L. A. Firm (supra), the Supreme Court specifically dealt…

KISHAN BEEJ,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 384/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.384/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kishan Beej Ito, Wared-2(1) बनाम Kashivishvanath Road Jamnagar – 361 001 Nr. P & T Office Vs. Jamnagar – 361 001 Pan : Aacfk 2114 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69Section 69A

…The expression 'information' in the context in which it occurs must, mean instruction or knowledge derived from an external source concerning facts or particulars, or as to law relating to a matter bearing on the assessment vide: CIT v. A. RAMAN & CO. [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC)]. Therefore, section 148 would point out to concrete information which could be facts which point out to a case of income having escaped assessment. Section 148A would only assist the Assessing Officer in coming to a conclusion whether such information is good enough to allow a notice to be issued under section 148. The new provisions should b…

RAMESH RAMANI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-10(5), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.68/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Prabhakar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

…nd it is the burden of the Department to prove the correctness of such additions. In the following cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had pronounced ratios to the same effect: (i) K.P. Varghese v, ITO [1981| 131 ITR 5971 (SC); (ii) CIT v. A. Roman & Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC); (iii) CIT v. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. [1973]91 ITR 8 (SC): (iv) Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT [1959| 37 ITR 271 (SC).99. Apart from these Supreme Court cases, we also wish to cite the following decisions from Hon'ble Appellate Tribunals. :- 4 -: Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Add. CIT (TAT Delhi) 1TA No. 2428/DEI/2014 - Date of Judgement/Order…

Showing 1–20 of 321 · Page 1 of 17

...