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#241 most cited

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

The mere lawful reorganization of a business transaction does not automatically imply an intent to evade tax, and genuine business adjustments should not be considered suppressive actions without clear evidence of such intent.

321

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. A. Raman & Co. · 67 ITR 11 · lawful reorganization of business · tax evasion · bona fide business practices · genuine business adjustments · intent to evade tax

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 Wa, Tiruchengode vs. C.Gopalan, Namakkal

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

ITA 941/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, CITFor Respondent: Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate for Shri G. Baskar, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…also argued that the reopening made after four years is therefore unlawful. 6.3. I have gone through the record and submissions filed by the assessee. I do not find any merit in the arguments of the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Raman & Co., 67 ITR 11 has observed as follows QUOTE: ………… …………. ………. but even if the information be such that it could have been obtained during the previous assessment from an investigation of the materials on record, or the facts disclosed thereby or from other inquiry, or research into facts or law, but was not obtained, the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer is n…

Aakash Films Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT -50, Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1762/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Aakash Films Private Limited V. Income Tax Officer – 16(1)(1) Room No. 436A, Plot No. A-51, Midc Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Marol Industrial Area Next To Aipma Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahca5657K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Aakash Ashish Realtors Limited V. Cit – 50, Central Circle – 8(3) Cts No. 766, 534 Mumbai S.V. Road, New Oshiwara Station Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai – 400102 Pan: Aaack7241C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…ls and must be given an adequate opportunity of explaining it -» Suspicious cannot take place the evidence 1. DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil, (Mum) (Trib) (ITA No. 6727/M/2012) 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. CIT1, (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. KASHIRAM…

M/S Kamuthi Agricultural Products Co Operative Marketing Society Limited, Ramnad vs. ITO Ward 1 (1), Ramanathapuram

ITA 414/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.414/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 V. M/S.Kamuthi Agricultural Producers The Income Tax Officer, Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd., Ward-1 (1), 5/206, Thiruchuli Road, Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram. Ramanathapuram District-623 603. [Pan: Aaaaa 0334 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…challenged disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80P(2) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. A. Raman & Co., reported in [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC) upheld the re- opening of assessment on the ground that the AO has re-opened the assessment on the basis of fresh tangible materials which suggest escapement and thus, the question of change of opinion does not arise. The Ld.CIT(A) had also upheld disallowance of proportionate deduction claimed u/s.80P(2) of the Act, on the ground that the…

Venkata Sai Agencies, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1624/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 418 (Raj.) 9. The ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the ld.CIT(A) in upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings. 10. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the ld. A…

Vasu Agencies, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1623/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

Vasu Pharma Distributors, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1622/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

G. Basavapoorna, Salem vs. ACIT, Salem

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

ITA 915/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 915/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of G. Basavapoorna (Individual), 12, Murugan Nagar, Raman Nagar Po, Income Tax, Circle Iii Mettur Dam, Salem District, Salem. Tamil Nadu 636 403. [Pan:Aeppb0023F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Dated 16.09.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. Besides Challenging Reopening Of Assessment Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Assessee Has Disputed Confirmation Of Unexplained Investments Under Section 69A Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 915/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of G. Basavapoorna (Individual), 12, Murugan Nagar, Raman Nagar PO, Income Tax, Circle III Mettur Dam, Salem District, Salem. Tamil Nadu 636 403. [PAN:AEPPB0023F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri A…

Shri Kamlesh Jayantilal Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1077/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Kamlesh Jayantilal Jhaveri, Income Tax Officer, B/201, Siddh Silla Apartment, Vs Ward 10(1), B/H. Ekta Tower, Barrage Road, Ahmedabad Vasna, Ahmedabad Pan : Aetpj 5973 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jaiswal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-5 [“Cit(A) In Short]” Dated 26.02.2015; And, The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Learned Cit(A) On Account Of Disallowance Of Assessee’S Claim For Loss Of Rs.12.64 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Jaiswal, CIT-DR

Section 145Section 145(2)

…eason of the fact that the purchases from the partners are shown to be at an inflated price. The Supreme Court has pointed out in Calcutta Discount Company's case [1973] 9.1 ITR 8 , 13 (SC), quoting from Commissioner of Income-tax v. A. Raman & Company [19681 67 ITR 11 (SC): "Avoidance of tax liability by so arranging commercial affairs that charge of tax is distributed is not prohibited. A taxpayer may resort to a device to divert the income before it accrues or arises to him. Effectiveness of the device depends not upon Considerations of morality, but on the operation of the Income-tax Act. Legislative injunct…

Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 959/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Mahavir Prasadassessment Year : 2011-12 Ananya Finance For Inclusive The Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Growth P Ltd. Ambawadi 401, Shaan, Op: M.J. Library Ahmedabad 380015. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aahca 8023 D

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ananya Finance for Inclusive The DCIT, Cir.1(1)(1) Growth P Ltd. Ambawadi 401, Shaan, Op: M.J. Library Ahmedabad 380015. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : AAHCA 8023 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee by Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parima…

Shri. Dudhganga Vedganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Kolhapur

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

ITA 1568/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pranjal S. PhadnisFor Respondent: Shri Hitendra B. Ninawe

Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ssee furnished following written submissions raising the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924-26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. Krishna SSK, (2012) 211 Taxman…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1880/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Co- Ordinate Bench Of Pune Tribunal In The Case Of Shree Adinath Ssk Ltd. Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Prakash SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

…submissions raising the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- 3 Ashok SSK Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924- 26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. Krishna SSK, (2012) 211 Taxman…

Tatyasaheb Kore Warana Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Kolhapur

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

ITA 1486/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Co- Ordinate Bench Of Pune Tribunal In The Case Of Shree Adinath Ssk Ltd. Vs. Acit In Ita No. 485/Pun/2019 For A.Y. 2013-14, Order Dated 11-05-2022, Wherein It Has Been Observed & Held As Under:

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Kulkarni &For Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

…see furnished following written submissions raising the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924- 26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 3 Tatyasaheb Kore Warana SSK Ltd. A.Y. 2015-16 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme…

Vaidyanath Kedeshwar Sakhar Udyog, Beed vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 444/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)

…ng the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- 7 Vaidyanath Kedeshar Sakhar Udyog A.Y. 2012-13 “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924- 26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. Krishna SSK, (2012) 211 Taxman…

The Dharmapuri District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Dharmapuri vs. JCIT, Salem

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistcial purposes to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1188/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1188/Chny/2016 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) The Dharmapuri District Central Jcit बनाम/ Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Range-Iii No.81/10H, Bye Pass Road, Salem. Vs. Dharmapuri – 636 701 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaat-3148-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 19-04-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 13-07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) – Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

…o the extent of Rs.7.36 Lacs. Appellate Prcoeedings 4. The assessee preferred further appeal and assailed the validity of assessment proceedings. However, not convinced, Ld. CIT(A), relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s A. Raman & Co. (67 ITR 11), held that source of information to reopen the assessment may be assessment record itself. Therefore, the legal ground assailing the reassessment proceedings were dismissed. The stand of Ld. AO, on merits, was also confirmed, inter-alia, by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in State Bank of Patiala V/s CIT (272 IT…

Karmayogi Shankarraoji Patil Ssk Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1152/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Hemant D. DhavleFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)

…see furnished following written submissions raising the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924- 26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. Krishna SSK, (2012) 211 Taxman…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(2), Bangalore vs. Mr. M R Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 256/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Naginchand Khincha

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153Section 153A

…d.AO. The information must precede the reasons to believe, as per provisions of Sec.147(b). We noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had occasion to interpret the word 'information', as used in sec.147(b) in the case of CIT v. A. Raman & Co. reported in (1968) 67 ITR 11. Hon;ble Court observed as under: 'The expression "information" in the context in which it occurs [in section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961] 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. To commence the proceedings for reassessmen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7214/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

…lders C.O. No. 221/MUM/2018 M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, the law does not oblige/compel a trader to make maximize its profits." g. The High Court of Bombay in the case of Sesa Sterlite (Supra) after referring Raman and Co. 67 ITR 11(SC) the court observed "the law does not oblige a trader to make' maximum profit out of his trading transactions. It is the income which accrues to a trader which is taxable in his hands; not the income which he could have, but has not earned. No doubt, by adopting a device, if it is made to appear that income which really belonged to the assessee…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7213/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7212/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

Shree Adinath Ssk Ltd, Solapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Solapur

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

ITA 485/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 May 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prasanna Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena (through physical)

Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…see furnished following written submissions raising the issues for consideration of the CIT(A) in respective cases :- “1. Hon’ble ITAT, Pune, in Chh. Shahu SSK ITA No. 1924- 26/PN/90 vide order dated 8/8/1996, at paras 32-39, following ratio of A. Raman & CO, 67 ITR 11 (SC), held that no income accrued to the assessee on sale of sugar at concession rate to its members. 2. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in CIT v. Terna SSSK, 301 ITR 222, has noted that Counsel for the Dept, in view of Circular No. 117 dt. 22/8/1973 did not press this ground in appeal. 3. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. Krishna SSK, (2012) 211 Taxman…