Addl. CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd.

113 ITR 389High Court1978#1225 most cited

What is Addl. CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer is competent to accept or draw proper inferences from auditors' reports. When books of accounts are audited by chartered accountants and there is no material on record to show they are unreliable, no addition challenging deductions supported by those books is tenable.

92

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Addl. CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd. · 113 ITR 389 · section 143(3) · audited books of accounts · reliability of accounts · Assessing Officer powers · additions without material · burden of proof · auditors' report · income tax assessment · inference from audit

Also reported as

124 CTR 213

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 131Section 153CSection 132(4)Section 69

Issues it is cited on

section 120(4)(b)section 3asection 2(15a)section 17(2)(iiia)abatement of assessmentsection 36(1)(v)section 4aillegal paymentsection 10(20)section 61section 46section 40a(7)

Judgments citing Addl. CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd.

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 486/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132(4)Section 153C

…he light of material omission or commission by the appellant. That audit reports prepared under statutory obligation constitute material which can be taken into consideration by authorities has held in the case of Additional CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd., 113 ITR 389. 35. Further no addition could be made in a search assessment in the absence of cogent incriminating evidence calling for addition and more particularly in an assessment made under section 153C which is incriminating evidence specific. Further, works executed by the appellant either directly or through subcontract cannot be doubted as these are g…

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 485/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132(4)Section 153C

…he light of material omission or commission by the appellant. That audit reports prepared under statutory obligation constitute material which can be taken into consideration by authorities has held in the case of Additional CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd., 113 ITR 389. 35. Further no addition could be made in a search assessment in the absence of cogent incriminating evidence calling for addition and more particularly in an assessment made under section 153C which is incriminating evidence specific. Further, works executed by the appellant either directly or through subcontract cannot be doubted as these are g…

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 484/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 132(4)Section 153C

…he light of material omission or commission by the appellant. That audit reports prepared under statutory obligation constitute material which can be taken into consideration by authorities has held in the case of Additional CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd., 113 ITR 389. 35. Further no addition could be made in a search assessment in the absence of cogent incriminating evidence calling for addition and more particularly in an assessment made under section 153C which is incriminating evidence specific. Further, works executed by the appellant either directly or through subcontract cannot be doubted as these are g…

DEEPANSHU SRIVASTAVA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 4064/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B

…which is highly appreciable and thus may kindly be accepted in the interest of justice. The assessee places heavy reliance on the judgment of jurisdictional High court in the case of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Jay Engineering works reported in 113 ITR 389 where the Hon'ble Delhi High court has emphasized and discussed about the importance of audited financial statements in absence of books of accounts. The court held- The question arises, therefore, whether the reports of the auditors could be said to be "material" on which reliance could be placed by the income-tax authorities. Unlike the proof…

DEEPANSHU SRIVASTAVA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

ITA 4063/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B

…which is highly appreciable and thus may kindly be accepted in the interest of justice. The assessee places heavy reliance on the judgment of jurisdictional High court in the case of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Jay Engineering works reported in 113 ITR 389 where the Hon'ble Delhi High court has emphasized and discussed about the importance of audited financial statements in absence of books of accounts. The court held- The question arises, therefore, whether the reports of the auditors could be said to be "material" on which reliance could be placed by the income-tax authorities. Unlike the proof…

GANESHARAM GALBARAM MALI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8349/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 69Section 69C

…\nof evidence. Relevant part of the order is reproduced as under,\n\"9. 12. It is well established in law that income-tax proceedings are not\ngoverned by the strict rules of evidence applicable in a court of law. In\nAddl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi), it was\nheld that the AO can rely on material which may not be admissible in a\ncourt of law, as long as it is relevant. Similarly, the Hon'ble Punjab &\nHaryana High Court in CIT v. Metal Products of India (1984) 150 ITR\n714 (P&H) held that the AO can collect evidence behind the back of the\nassessee, provided it is material and forms…

GANESHARAM GALBARAM MALI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8348/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69C

…rules of evidence. Relevant part of the order is reproduced as under, "9.12. It is well established in law that income-tax proceedings are not governed by the strict rules of evidence applicable in a court of law. In Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi), it was held that the AO can rely on material which may not be admissible in a court of law, as long as it is relevant. Similarly, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Metal Products of India (1984) 150 ITR 714 (P&H) held that the AO can collect evidence behind the back of the assessee, provided it is material and forms the b…

GANESHARAM GALBARAM MALI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8347/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69C

…rules of evidence. Relevant part of the order is reproduced as under, "9.12. It is well established in law that income-tax proceedings are not governed by the strict rules of evidence applicable in a court of law. In Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi), it was held that the AO can rely on material which may not be admissible in a court of law, as long as it is relevant. Similarly, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Metal Products of India (1984) 150 ITR 714 (P&H) held that the AO can collect evidence behind the back of the assessee, provided it is material and forms the b…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (1),, VARANASI vs. PROMINENT DATAMATICS MARKETING PVT. LTD., , VARANASI

ITA 135/VNS/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 124(1)(a)Section 124(2)Section 124(3)(a)Section 250(1)Section 255(4)Section 69A

…e produced") the audited accounts could very well be taken as base, keeping in view the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case I.T.A. No.135/VNS/2020 23 C.IO.No.04/VNS/2021 Assessment Year:2017-18 of Addi. CIT Vs. Jai Engineering reported in (1978) 113 ITR 389 (Delhi High Court), wherein their lordships have observed and held as under:- The Income-tax authorities could, therefore, come to the conclusion that since the auditors were required by the statute to find out if the deductions claimed by the assessee in their balance-sheets and profit and loss accounts were supported by the relevant entries in…

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6525/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69C

…und by technical\nrules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act, and\nhe is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as\nevidence in a court of law.\"\n\n8. 8. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg.\nWorks Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi) held that the Assessing\nOfficer has, no doubt, to hear \"evidence\", but such evidence may\nconsist of material which would be wholly inadmissible in a court\nof law.\n\n8. 9. In CIT v. Metal Products of India [1984] 150 ITR 714 (Punj.\n&Har.), it was held that the Assessing Officer may gather\ninformation in any manner he likes, behind…

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6524/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69C

…bound by technical\nrules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act, and\nhe is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as\nevidence in a court of law.\"\n8. 8. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg.\nWorks Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi) held that the Assessing\nOfficer has, no doubt, to hear \"evidence\", but such evidence may\nconsist of material which would be wholly inadmissible in a court\nof law.\n8. 9. In CIT v. Metal Products of India [1984] 150 ITR 714 (Punj.\n&Har.), it was held that the Assessing Officer may gather\ninformation in any manner he likes, behind t…

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6523/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69C

…bound by technical\nrules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act, and\nhe is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as\nevidence in a court of law.\"\n8. 8. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg.\nWorks Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 389 (Delhi) held that the Assessing\nOfficer has, no doubt, to hear \"evidence\", but such evidence may\nconsist of material which would be wholly inadmissible in a court\nof law.\n8. 9. In CIT v. Metal Products of India [1984] 150 ITR 714 (Punj.\n&Har.), it was held that the Assessing Officer may gather\ninformation in any manner he likes, behind t…

PRIYANKA SANDEEP RUNWAL,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6524/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

…A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. (113 ITR 389) Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Metal and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Products of India (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Of…

PRIYANKA SANDEEP RUNWAL,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6523/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

…A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. (113 ITR 389) Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Metal and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Products of India (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Of…

PRIYANKA SANDEEP RUNWAL ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6522/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

…A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. (113 ITR 389) Addl. CIT v. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Metal and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Products of India (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Officer (150 ITR 714) to hold that the Assessing Of…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…sions of the Companies Act and also under Income Tax Act and the Assessing Officer has no material on record to show that the books of accounts are unreliable then no addition is tenable. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the following judgments i) 113 ITR 389 (Del) ACIT vs. Jay Engineering Works ...it is quite competent for the income-tax authorities not only to accept the auditors' report, but also to draw the proper inference from the same. The income-tax authorities could, therefore, come to the conclusion that since the auditors were required by the statute to find out if the deductions claimed…

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. CDS INFRA PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and cross-objection of Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1445/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Cds Infra Projects Ltd., B-94, Tax, Circle 4(2), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi. New Delhi-110020 Pan :Aadcc0273D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

…urden against the presumption of correctness of entries recorded and seized material are not correct and assessee further relied on the following judgments: i). Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC); ii) Addl. CIT Vs. Jay Engg. Works Ltd. 113 ITR 389 (Del.); iii) S.S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co. 53 ITR 231 (SC); iv ) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC); v ) Nokia India (P) Ltd. v. DDIT 59 taxmann.com 212, ITAT Delhi; vi) Hersh Win Chadha v DCIT 135 TTJ 513 ITAT Delhi; vii) GTC Industries Ltd. v. ACIT 65 ITD 380, ITAT Mumbai; ix ) Smt. Kusum Lata Thakral v CIT, 150 ITR 714 P & H High C…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3),, MUMBAI vs. PRADEEP PHULCHAND AGARWAL, MUMBAI

ITA 4181/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C” BENCH MUMBAI\n\nBEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\nITA No. 3852/MUM/2025 (AY:2015–16)\n\nVs.\nDy. Commissioner of\nIncome Tax, Central\nCircle-3(3),\n406, 4th floor, Kautilya\nBhawan, BKC, Bandra\n(E), Mumbai- 400051\nPAN: AAAJPA0473C\n(Appellant)\n\nPradeep Phulchand Agarwal\n254-B Nirlon House, Ld.DR.\nAnnie Besant Road, Worli,\nMumbai, Mumbai- 400030\n(Respondent)\n\n..\n\nITA No. 4181/MUM/2025 (AY:2017-18)\n&\nITA No. 4136/MUM/2025 (AY:2019-20)\n\nVs.\nDy. Commissioner of\nIncome Tax, Central\nCircl…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. PRADEEP PHULCHAND AGARWAL, MUMBAI

ITA 4136/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C” BENCH MUMBAI\nBEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA No. 3852/MUM/2025 (AY:2015–16)\nVs.\nDy. Commissioner of\nIncome Tax, Central\nCircle-3(3),\n406, 4th floor, Kautilya\nBhawan, BKC, Bandra\n(E), Mumbai- 400051\nPAN: AAAJPA0473C\n(Appellant)\nPradeep Phulchand Agarwal\n254-B Nirlon House, Ld.DR.\nAnnie Besant Road, Worli,\nMumbai, Mumbai- 400030\n(Respondent)\nITA No. 4181/MUM/2025 (AY:2017-18)\n&\nITA No. 4136/MUM/2025 (AY:2019-20)\nVs.\nDy. Commissioner of\nIncome Tax, Central\nCircle-3(3),\n406, 4th…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PRADEEP PHULCHAND AGARWAL, MUMBAI

ITA 3852/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal Income Tax, Central 254-B Nirlon House, Ld.DR. Circle-3(3), Annie Besant Road, Worli, 406, 4th floor, Kautilya Mumbai, Mumbai- 400030 Bhawan, BKC, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 PAN: AAAJPA0473C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal Income Tax, Central 4 B, Agarwal House Circle-3(3), Pochkanwala Road, Worli 406, 4th floor, Kautilya Colony S.O., Mumbai- Bhawan, BKC, Bandra 400030 (E), Mumbai-…

Showing 1–20 of 92 · Page 1 of 5

Addl. CIT v. Jay Engineering Works Ltd. (113 ITR 389) — Cited in 92 Judgments | BharatTax