Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar

97 ITR 696High Court1974#699 most cited

What is Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made solely based on documents or material found from a third party's premises unless the Assessing Officer conducts an independent investigation, examines the third party, and establishes a clear link between the material and the assessee.

145

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar · 97 ITR 696 · section 132 · section 132(4A) · documents from third party · material from third party · independent investigation · additions to income · linking evidence · corroboration · unexplained income · 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4A)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 292CSection 69ASection 69CSection 153A

Issues it is cited on

hundi transactionsection 44afjewellery found during searchsection 132(4a)section 65bsection 65dumb documentssection 150unexplained jewellerysection 292cretraction of statementthird party information

Judgments citing Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar

Dy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Sangli Circle, Sangli vs. Anand Developers, Sangli

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 67/PUN/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel &
Section 143(3)Section 42

…. Without prejudice to the above, it is contended that there was no evidence to say that on-money was paid during the year under consideration placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar, 97 ITR 696 (Bom.), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court held that no addition can be made merely based on the entries found in the books of the third party without any corroborative evidence. 12. Similarly, as regard to the addition of Rs.1,05,80,000/- being the alleged on-money paid at the time of purchase of property at Kasaba Bavada, Kolhapur from Ulpe Family…

Anand Developers, Sangli vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Sangli

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 458/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel &
Section 143(3)Section 42

…. Without prejudice to the above, it is contended that there was no evidence to say that on-money was paid during the year under consideration placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar, 97 ITR 696 (Bom.), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court held that no addition can be made merely based on the entries found in the books of the third party without any corroborative evidence. 12. Similarly, as regard to the addition of Rs.1,05,80,000/- being the alleged on-money paid at the time of purchase of property at Kasaba Bavada, Kolhapur from Ulpe Family…

Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai Patel, Jamnagar vs. The ITO Ward-3(2), Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 105/RJT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 103 To 105/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Patel Ward 3(2), Jamnagar Vs. Plot No.3990, Gidc, Phase-Iii, Dared, Jamnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp6152H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 01/11/2022 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 25/01/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: This Bunch Of Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 28.07.2021 (For A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2011-12) & 27.07.2021 (For A.Y. 2010-11) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ow about parties who have deposited the amount. Since the said amount represents out of books sales/sale consideration of businessmen of Jamnagar, hence liable to pay taxes on them”. The counsel for the assessee relied upon the case of ACIT v. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696, wherein it was held that entries made in the accounts of third-party regarding payment to the assessee is not sufficient as there is no guarantee that the entries were genuine in absence of any corroborative evidence. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the statement of Shri Dharmendra Doshi was accepted by the ADIT at face value, without…

Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai Patel, Jamnagar vs. The ITO Ward-3(2), Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/RJT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 103 To 105/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Patel Ward 3(2), Jamnagar Vs. Plot No.3990, Gidc, Phase-Iii, Dared, Jamnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp6152H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 01/11/2022 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 25/01/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: This Bunch Of Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 28.07.2021 (For A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2011-12) & 27.07.2021 (For A.Y. 2010-11) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ow about parties who have deposited the amount. Since the said amount represents out of books sales/sale consideration of businessmen of Jamnagar, hence liable to pay taxes on them”. The counsel for the assessee relied upon the case of ACIT v. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696, wherein it was held that entries made in the accounts of third-party regarding payment to the assessee is not sufficient as there is no guarantee that the entries were genuine in absence of any corroborative evidence. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the statement of Shri Dharmendra Doshi was accepted by the ADIT at face value, without…

Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai Patel, Jamnagar vs. The ITO Ward-3(2), Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 103/RJT/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 103 To 105/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Kanjibhai Tapubhai The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Patel Ward 3(2), Jamnagar Vs. Plot No.3990, Gidc, Phase-Iii, Dared, Jamnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp6152H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 01/11/2022 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 25/01/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: This Bunch Of Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 28.07.2021 (For A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2011-12) & 27.07.2021 (For A.Y. 2010-11) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ow about parties who have deposited the amount. Since the said amount represents out of books sales/sale consideration of businessmen of Jamnagar, hence liable to pay taxes on them”. The counsel for the assessee relied upon the case of ACIT v. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696, wherein it was held that entries made in the accounts of third-party regarding payment to the assessee is not sufficient as there is no guarantee that the entries were genuine in absence of any corroborative evidence. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the statement of Shri Dharmendra Doshi was accepted by the ADIT at face value, without…

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax 19(1), Mumbai vs. Ketan Anil Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2188/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Commissioner Of Ketan Anil Shah Income-Tax 19(1), Mumbai, 44/B Rajul Apartment Vs. Matru Mandir, Room No.203, J Mehta Marg, Napean Sea Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007 Road, Mumbai-400 006 Pan No. Aaips 9400 J Appellant Respondent : Revenue By Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Anish Shah, Ca & Shri Haridas Bhat Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01/2023

For Appellant: Shri Anish Shah, CA &For Respondent: Revenue by Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 45V

…placed on Asst. CIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte 87 Taxmann.com 116 (ITAT Mum) Addl. CIT Vs. Miss Lata Rosemary Turcotte 87 Taxmann.com 116 (ITAT Mum) Addl. CIT Vs. Miss Lata Rosemary Turcotte 87 Taxmann.com 116 (ITAT Mum) Addl. CIT Vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696 (Bom). Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696 (Bom). loss of Rs.10,91,53,148/-. And the P&L a/c of the assessee for the year ende loss of Rs.10,91,53,148/ . And the P&L a/c of the assessee for the year ended shows a debit of Rs.10,91,53,148/ debit of Rs.10,91,53,148/- under the title 'Loss on account of Commodities under the title 'Loss on account of Commodities i…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Skyline Construction, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 752/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
Section 132(1)Section 133A

…from a third party without corroborating the same with the assessee. It also contended that the seized documents should be considered as dumb documents. In this regard the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws :- a) Addl.CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) b) CBI Vs. Shri V.C. Shukla (3 SCC 410) c) Shri Mustafamiya H. Sheikh (ITA No. 2588/Ahd/2012 dated 15.2.2013) d) DCIT Vs. H.S. Chandramouli (ITA No. 1551/Bang/2012 dated 30.8.2013) 28 M/s. Poonam Shanti Developers Group e) M/s. Mohd. Ayub Mohd. Yakub Perfumers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 388/LKW/2013 dated 10.12.2014) f) DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal (ITA…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Shanti Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 751/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2013-14
Section 132(1)Section 133A

…from a third party without corroborating the same with the assessee. It also contended that the seized documents should be considered as dumb documents. In this regard the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws :- a) Addl.CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) b) CBI Vs. Shri V.C. Shukla (3 SCC 410) c) Shri Mustafamiya H. Sheikh (ITA No. 2588/Ahd/2012 dated 15.2.2013) d) DCIT Vs. H.S. Chandramouli (ITA No. 1551/Bang/2012 dated 30.8.2013) 28 M/s. Poonam Shanti Developers Group e) M/s. Mohd. Ayub Mohd. Yakub Perfumers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 388/LKW/2013 dated 10.12.2014) f) DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal (ITA…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Realty, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2014-15
Section 132(1)Section 133A

…from a third party without corroborating the same with the assessee. It also contended that the seized documents should be considered as dumb documents. In this regard the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws :- a) Addl.CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) b) CBI Vs. Shri V.C. Shukla (3 SCC 410) c) Shri Mustafamiya H. Sheikh (ITA No. 2588/Ahd/2012 dated 15.2.2013) d) DCIT Vs. H.S. Chandramouli (ITA No. 1551/Bang/2012 dated 30.8.2013) 28 M/s. Poonam Shanti Developers Group e) M/s. Mohd. Ayub Mohd. Yakub Perfumers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 388/LKW/2013 dated 10.12.2014) f) DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal (ITA…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Mega Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 749/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
Section 132(1)Section 133A

…from a third party without corroborating the same with the assessee. It also contended that the seized documents should be considered as dumb documents. In this regard the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws :- a) Addl.CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) b) CBI Vs. Shri V.C. Shukla (3 SCC 410) c) Shri Mustafamiya H. Sheikh (ITA No. 2588/Ahd/2012 dated 15.2.2013) d) DCIT Vs. H.S. Chandramouli (ITA No. 1551/Bang/2012 dated 30.8.2013) 28 M/s. Poonam Shanti Developers Group e) M/s. Mohd. Ayub Mohd. Yakub Perfumers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 388/LKW/2013 dated 10.12.2014) f) DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal (ITA…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Mega Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 748/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12
Section 132(1)Section 133A

…from a third party without corroborating the same with the assessee. It also contended that the seized documents should be considered as dumb documents. In this regard the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws :- a) Addl.CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) b) CBI Vs. Shri V.C. Shukla (3 SCC 410) c) Shri Mustafamiya H. Sheikh (ITA No. 2588/Ahd/2012 dated 15.2.2013) d) DCIT Vs. H.S. Chandramouli (ITA No. 1551/Bang/2012 dated 30.8.2013) 28 M/s. Poonam Shanti Developers Group e) M/s. Mohd. Ayub Mohd. Yakub Perfumers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 388/LKW/2013 dated 10.12.2014) f) DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal (ITA…

Shri Mukeshkumar Vrajlal Akbari, Jamnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1), Jamngar, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 55/RJT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ow about parties who have deposited the amount. Since the said amount represents out of books sales/sale consideration of businessmen of Jamnagar, hence liable to pay taxes on them”. The counsel for the assessee relied upon the case of ACIT v. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696, wherein it was held that entries made in the accounts of third-party regarding payment to the assessee is not sufficient as there is no guarantee that the entries were genuine in absence of any corroborative evidence. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the statement of Shri Dharmendra Doshi was accepted by the ADIT at face value, without…

Shri Mukeshkumar Vrajlal Akbari, Jamnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1), Jamngar, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 54/RJT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ow about parties who have deposited the amount. Since the said amount represents out of books sales/sale consideration of businessmen of Jamnagar, hence liable to pay taxes on them”. The counsel for the assessee relied upon the case of ACIT v. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696, wherein it was held that entries made in the accounts of third-party regarding payment to the assessee is not sufficient as there is no guarantee that the entries were genuine in absence of any corroborative evidence. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the statement of Shri Dharmendra Doshi was accepted by the ADIT at face value, without…

DCIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Premier Supplies & Services P Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1384/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – 15(2)(2) V. M/S. Premier Supplies & Services Pvt. Ltd., Office No. 47, Satya Sai Plaza Room No. 357, 3Rd Floor Sector-11, Plot No. 5 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Panvel, Navi Mumbai - 410206 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaccg2655A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…proof was on the department to prove that amount in dispute belongs to the assessee. If the department does not came with material evidence to prove the same, then the same amount cannot be added as undisclosed income of the assessee. ACIT vs Lata Mangeshkar: 97 ITR 696 (BOM) In this case, the assessee, who is an acknowledged play-back singer, disclosing professional receipts of Rs.1,43,650/- Rs. 1,38,251/- and Rs. 1,19,850/ respectively, which were principally based upon the diaries which were maintained by the assessee in which proper entries were made in respect of receipts received by her for the professional…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir.-2, Surat vs. Shri Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Bhadani, Surat

In the result, summarized and concise ground No

ITA 45/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.25 &31/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Bhadani, Prop. Of M/S Rangeela Fashion, 14, Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No. 505, 5Th Floor, Nirman Industrial Estate, A.K. Road, Fulpada, Surat Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Vs. Surat-395001. Deputy Commissioner Of Income- Rameshbai Raghavhai Bhadani Plot No.14-16, Nirman Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No.505, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Industrial Estate, A./K. Road, Surat-395008 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adkpb 0556 F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.45/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Income-Tax, Circle-3, Room No. Bhadani, Prop. Of M/S Rangeela Vs. 505, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Fashion, 14, Nirman Industrial Majura Gate, Surat-395001. Estate, A.K. Road, Fulpada, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adkpb 0556 F (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A.L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./IT(SS)A Nos.25 &31/SRT/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner of Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Bhadani, Prop. of M/s Rangeela Fashion, 14, Income-tax, Central Circle-2, Room No. 505, 5th Floor, Nirman Industrial Estate, A.K. Road, Fulpada, Surat Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Vs. Surat-395001. Deputy Commissioner of Income- Rameshbai Raghavhai Bhadani Plot No.14-16, Nirman tax, Central Circle-2, Room No.505, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Industrial Estate…

The ITO, Ward-2(2)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Dushyant U Patel, Ahmedabad

ITA 1197/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman
Section 132Section 292CSection 69

…he Act in absence of any identification of incriminating material merely oral statement cannot be used as incriminating material against the assessee and has no evidentiary value in the light of the ratio laid down in the case of Addl.CIT vs. Lata Mangeshkar (97 ITR 696) and Prarthna Construction Pvt. Ltd., Tax Appeal No.79 of 2000 (Guj.). The Ld.ClT(A) has rightly quoted on page no.49 that "I am getting impression that Prajapati Group desired to cooperate with the department to disclose certain amounts for payments of additional taxes and for that reason only mentioned receipt of 'On-money' without identifying e…

The ACIT Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Goyal Developers, Indore

ITA 52/IND/2021[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Indore17 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…014, (HC)(Bombay) 5 Commissioner Of Income tax Vs. Shri Pramod Choudhary D.B. 55 – 65 M/s. Goyal Developers ITA No.51/Ind/2021 & others Income Tax Appeal No. 77 / 2004 (HC)(Raj.) 6 Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Miss Lata 66 – 68 Mangeshkar [1974] 97 ITR 696 (BOM.)(HC) 69 - 75 7 Income-tax Officer v. Bharat A. Mehta (HC)(Guj.) [2015] 60 taxmann.com 31 (Gujarat) 76 - 84 8 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-III, Ahmedabad v. Vivek Prahladbhai Patel [2016] 66 taxmann.com 41 (Gujarat)(HC) 9 Pradeep Amrutlal Runwal v. Tax Recovery Officer, Range-3, 85 - 100 Pune [2014] 47 taxmann.com 293 (Pune - Trib.) 1…

The ACIT Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Goyal Developers, Indore

ITA 51/IND/2021[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore17 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…014, (HC)(Bombay) 5 Commissioner Of Income tax Vs. Shri Pramod Choudhary D.B. 55 – 65 M/s. Goyal Developers ITA No.51/Ind/2021 & others Income Tax Appeal No. 77 / 2004 (HC)(Raj.) 6 Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Miss Lata 66 – 68 Mangeshkar [1974] 97 ITR 696 (BOM.)(HC) 69 - 75 7 Income-tax Officer v. Bharat A. Mehta (HC)(Guj.) [2015] 60 taxmann.com 31 (Gujarat) 76 - 84 8 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-III, Ahmedabad v. Vivek Prahladbhai Patel [2016] 66 taxmann.com 41 (Gujarat)(HC) 9 Pradeep Amrutlal Runwal v. Tax Recovery Officer, Range-3, 85 - 100 Pune [2014] 47 taxmann.com 293 (Pune - Trib.) 1…

ITO 6 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Aniata Dyes & Intermediates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6976/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2021AY 2008-09
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 68

…and without giving opportunity to the assessee, the addition cannot be made based on some report or the statement of a third party. Reliance is placed on Asst. CIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte 87 Taxmann.com 116 (ITAT Mum) Addl. CIT Vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696 (Bom). In this case, the AO brushed aside the evidence produced by the appellant in a casual manner only by discussing the case laws only. On the other hand, the appellant was able to establish the identity and the creditworthiness of the creditors as well as the genuineness of transaction. When the investor company is filing regular Income tax re…

The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. El Dorado Biotech Private Limited, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1823/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2020AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Ketan Shah & Aman ShahFor Respondent: Shri M.S.A. Khan, CITDR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…tion of Shri Partik R. Shah was not provided to the assessee despite the request made by it (the assessee) which was sine qua non before making any addition. In this respect the Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar [1974] 97 ITR 696 (Bom.) held as under: "Revenue has got a tendency to make an addition on the basis of entries appearing in the books of a third party or a statement recorded from a third party or loose papers seized from a third party. In all such cases, it is imperative to afford an opportunity to the assessee to cross-examine the said third party." 27. Simila…