Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT

123 ITR 457Supreme Court of India1980#452 most cited

What is Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT authority for?

Penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Findings recorded in assessment proceedings are relevant but not conclusive for penalty proceedings.

202

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT · penalty proceedings · assessment proceedings · separate and distinct · findings not conclusive · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 270A · quantum proceedings · penalty assessment distinction

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 69ASection 143(2)Section 292C

Issues it is cited on

section 270(a)record datesection 270a(8)section 270a(6)section 114section 270a(9)section 271(l)(c)section 142(2a)section 269ssdumb documentspenalty u/s 270asection 245

Judgments citing Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mohanlal Jewellers Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 1394/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…d perused the material placed before us. Before adverting to the facts of the case, we first take note of the principle of telescoping which has since been judicially approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457). In the decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on ad hoc basis, then such income is commonly described as intangible addition; but it is very much a part of assessee's real income as disclosed in his account books and has the same concrete existence. The Hon'ble Court held that, the secret profits or undisclosed inco…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…nexus between the entity's income and the assessee's individual expenditure, the claim for set-off is speculative and unsupported. 2. Onus on the Assessee Not Discharged: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT [(1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC)] held that even when intangible income is assessed, the burden lies on the assessee to prove that such income was available and was used to meet subsequent unexplained investments or expenses. The assessee has failed this test. Similarly, the principle laid down in CIT v. Tyaryamal Bal Chand [(1986) 54 CTR 0304 (Raj.)] makes it clear that on…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 497/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…nexus between the entity's income and the assessee's individual expenditure, the claim for set-off is speculative and unsupported. 2. Onus on the Assessee Not Discharged: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT [(1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC)] held that even when intangible income is assessed, the burden lies on the assessee to prove that such income was available and was used to meet subsequent unexplained investments or expenses. The assessee has failed this test. Similarly, the principle laid down in CIT v. Tyaryamal Bal Chand [(1986) 54 CTR 0304 (Raj.)] makes it clear that on…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 496/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…nexus between the entity's income and the assessee's individual expenditure, the claim for set-off is speculative and unsupported. 2. Onus on the Assessee Not Discharged: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT [(1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC)] held that even when intangible income is assessed, the burden lies on the assessee to prove that such income was available and was used to meet subsequent unexplained investments or expenses. The assessee has failed this test. Similarly, the principle laid down in CIT v. Tyaryamal Bal Chand [(1986) 54 CTR 0304 (Raj.)] makes it clear that on…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 493/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…nexus between the entity's income and the assessee's individual expenditure, the claim for set-off is speculative and unsupported. 2. Onus on the Assessee Not Discharged: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT [(1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC)] held that even when intangible income is assessed, the burden lies on the assessee to prove that such income was available and was used to meet subsequent unexplained investments or expenses. The assessee has failed this test. Similarly, the principle laid down in CIT v. Tyaryamal Bal Chand [(1986) 54 CTR 0304 (Raj.)] makes it clear that on…

Vinod Jindal, Faridabad, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Faridabad, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1923/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

Vinod Jindal, Faridabad, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Faridabad, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1921/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

Vinod Jindal, Faridabad, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Faridabad, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1920/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

Vinod Jindal, Faridabad, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Faridabad, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1919/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

Vinod Jindal, Faridabad, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Faridabad, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1918/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

DCIT- Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Radhamohan Marketing Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 3 of the revenue challenging the decision of ld

ITA 1600/MUM/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Dcit - Central Circle-3(4), Radhamohan Marketing Mumbai Private Limited Room No. 25, Shanti Bhawan, 2Nd Vs. Floor, Near Brijwasi Sweet 198, Kalba Devi Road, Mumbai – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aafcr5067C (Appellant) : (Respondent) C.O. No. 88/Mum/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 1600/Mum/2025) (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Radhamohan Marketing Private Dcit - Central Circle-3(4), Limited Mumbai Room No. 25, Shanti Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, Near Brijwasi Sweet 198, Vs. Kalba Devi Road, Mumbai – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aafcr5067C (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, (CIT-
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 69A

…made in order to comply with the law and for all cash sales above Rs.2,00,000/-, PAN is insisted from the buyers. As regards telescoping in general, it is judicially accepted methodologyas laid down in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) and several other decisions, though the onus of proving that the generation of income and its application is one and the same lies solely on the appellant. It is also seen that this plea was first taken by the Director of the appellant before the Investigation Wing itself that was within 15 days of the date of search. The appellant has also…

Thekkinian Paulose Varkey, Thrissur vs. ACIT, Circle 2(1), Thrissur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 960/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Thekkinian Poulose Varkey .......... Appellant Thekkinian (H), Koratty South P.O., Thrissur 68030 [Pan: Aedpv4959E] Vs. Acit, Circle - 2(1), Thrissur .......... Respondent Assessee By: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 26.09.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Executing Construction Contracts Under The Name & Style Of T.P. Constructions. The Return Of Income For Ay 2017-18 Was Filed On 01.11.2017 Declaring Income Of Rs. 77,93,730/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Acit, Circle 2(1), Thrissur (Hereinafter Called

For Appellant: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…represented by such addition is a part of real income and can be available to the assessee for subsequent application. Reference in this regard can be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT [1980] 123 ITR 457 and the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Smt. Annamma Paul v. CIT [1979] 121 ITR 433 wherein it was held as under: - “1. It was for the assessee to give a satisfactory explanation in regard to the case credit entries. If the assessee's explanation is found to be unacceptable, the entries may be taken to represent his inco…

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…en the door will be left wide open to evade tax. [Refer judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540] It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1980] 123 ITR 457 (SC)/[1980] 16 CTR 189 (SC)[15-04-1980] as under- "Neither law nor human experience guarantees that an assessee who has been dishonest in one assessment year is bound to be honest in a subsequent assessment year." It is held by the Hon'ble ITAT in Sushil Kumar Mohnani vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward, Katni (M.P.) [2011] 9 taxmann.com 314 (Jabalpur)…

Soregam Sa, Belgium vs. ACIT International Taxation Tax Gurgaon, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1919/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

Soregam Sa, Belgium vs. ACIT International Taxationtax Gurgaon, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1918/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…270A(9) of the Act? 16. It is well settled that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are separate and distinct. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veera Singhaiah & Co. Vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC) wherein it was held that findings recorded in SHRI VINOD JINDAL assessment proceedings cannot be taken as conclusive for penalty proceedings. Even the provisions of section 270A(6) of the Act provides for granting immunity from penalty if the case falls in "under reporting of income". Moreover different rates of penalty are prescribed for '…

ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar vs. Sh. Tara Chand Gupta, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 514/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 447 to 449/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 cuke Shri Tarachand Gupta ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke…

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 449/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 447 to 449/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 cuke Shri Tarachand Gupta ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke…

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 447/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठोड कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017…

Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Natesan Sabesan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2018

ITA 974/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132

…ake note of the principle of telescoping which has since been judicially approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457) AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457) AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457). In the decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on ad hoc basis, then such…

Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Natesan Sabesan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2018

ITA 973/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132

…ake note of the principle of telescoping which has since been judicially approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457) AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457) AnantharamVeerasinghaiah& Co. Vs CIT (123 ITR 457). In the decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on decided case, it was held that where the assessee offers any income on ad hoc basis, then such…