Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE

281 CTR 241Supreme Court of India2015#32 most cited

What is Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE authority for?

An assessee must be given an opportunity to cross-examine third parties whose statements are relied upon for adverse findings. Failure to provide this opportunity is a serious flaw rendering the order a nullity.

1,335

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Andaman Timber Industries · cross-examination · third party information · principles of natural justice · adverse inference · retraction of statement · section 132(4) · section 143(3) · nullity of order · denial of cross-examination

Also reported as

62 Taxmann.com 3127 DTR 241324 ELT 6412015 SCC OnLine SC 1051

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

third party informationsection 65section 65bpreponderance of probabilitysection 131(1a)retracted statementsection 132(4a)on-moneysection 69bdumb documentsbogus ltcgstatement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE

Subhash Chander Gupta, H.No. 1652 8 Vishnu Colony, Railway Road, Kurukshetra, Haryana vs. ITO Ward-3, Kurukshetra, Haryana

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are

ITA 765/CHANDI/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Abhinav Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 765/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Subhash Chander Gupta, The ITO, Vs House No. 1652 8, Vishnu Colony, Ward 3, Railway Road, Kurukshetra. Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAUPG0038Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 768/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Subhash Chander Gupta, The JCIT, Vs House No. 1652 8, Vishnu Colony, Kurukshetra. R…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6281/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ity to cross examination has been provided thus in our view additions are not sustainable On this proposition reliance is being placed on the following decisions: a) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC); 281 CTR 241 (SC) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 that once the not given by the AO as well as Ld CIT(A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law.…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6280/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ity to cross examination has been provided thus in our view additions are not sustainable On this proposition reliance is being placed on the following decisions: a) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC); 281 CTR 241 (SC) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 that once the not given by the AO as well as Ld CIT(A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law.…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6279/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ity to cross examination has been provided thus in our view additions are not sustainable On this proposition reliance is being placed on the following decisions: a) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC); 281 CTR 241 (SC) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 that once the not given by the AO as well as Ld CIT(A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law.…

Income Tax Officer, Jamnagar vs. Nilesh Bipinchandra Mehta, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 750 /Rjt/ 2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Jamnagar Vs. Nilesh Bipinchandra Mehta Prop. Of B. J. Industries Tej Prakash Society, P. N. Marg Jamnagar 361001, Gujarat India स्थायी लेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpm8295H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/04/2025 आदेश / Order Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [(In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 21.08.2024, Which In Turn Assessment Order Passed By Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department / Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act"). 1

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…fastened on him without any supporting evidence. The appellant also relied on various case judgements:- (a) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC) (b) Krishna Chand Chela Ram Vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) (c) Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CIT (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 3 (SC) (d) Ayubkhan Noorkhan Pathan Vs. State of Mharashtra & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 7728 of 2012 dated 08/11/2012) (e) Khem Chand Vs. Union of India (AIR 1958 SC 300) (1) Amitabh Bansal Vs. ITO Ward-46(4), [2019] 102 taxmann.com 229 (g) CIT Vs. Indrajit Singh Suri [2013] 33 taxmann.com 281 (Guj) (h) PCIT Vs. Kanubhai Maganlal Patel [2017] 79…

ACIT-Cir.20(1), Mumbai vs. Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2639/MUM/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Biswanth Das, CIT-DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, ACIT, B-904, 9th Floor, Circle-20(2), Pratiksha Tower, 2017/Mum/2024 2017-18 Piramal Chambers, RS Nimkar Marg, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai Central-400008 Mumbai-400012 [PAN: AIFPJ1531N] Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, ACIT, B-904, 9th Floor, Circle-20(1), Pratiksha Tower, 2639/Mum/2024 2017-18 Piramal Chambers, RS Nimkar Marg, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai Central- Mumbai-400012 400008 [PAN: AIFPJ1531N] Assessee by : Shri Nee…

Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, Mumbai Central vs. ACIT Circle-20(2) Mumbai, Piramal Chamber

ITA 2017/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Biswanth Das, CIT-DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER | ITA No. | Α.Υ. | Appellant | Respondent | |---|---|---|---| | 2017/Mum/2024 | 2017-18 | Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, B-904, 9th Floor, Pratiksha Tower, RS Nimkar Marg, Mumbai Central-400008 [PAN: AIFPJ1531N] | ACIT, Circle-20(2), Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 | | 2639/Mum/2024 | 2017-18 | ACIT, Circle-20(1), Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 | Hitesh Joitkumar Jain, B-904, 9th Floor, Pratiksha Tower, RS Nimkar Marg, Mumbai Central-400…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot

In the result, assessee's ground No

ITA 49/RJT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट"यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./IT(SS)A No. 06 & 07 & 08& 09/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11 to 2012-13 &2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Pankajkumar Chimanlal Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle - Lodhiya 2, C/o, Shreeji Trading Co., 10- Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Shaligram Complex, Estate, 2nd Floor, M. G. Bhupendra Road, Opp. Road, Diwanpara Police Chowki, Rajkot - 360001 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.:AAMPL3903F (Assessee) (Respo…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot

In the result, assessee's ground No

ITA 46/RJT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट"यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./IT(SS)A No. 06 & 07 & 08& 09/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11 to 2012-13 &2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Pankajkumar Chimanlal Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle - Lodhiya 2, C/o, Shreeji Trading Co., 10- Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Shaligram Complex, Estate, 2nd Floor, M. G. Bhupendra Road, Opp. Road, Diwanpara Police Chowki, Rajkot - 360001 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.:AAMPL3903F (Assessee) (Respo…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot

In the result, assessee's ground No

ITA 102/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट"यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./IT(SS)A No. 06 & 07 & 08& 09/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11 to 2012-13 &2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Pankajkumar Chimanlal Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle - Lodhiya 2, C/o, Shreeji Trading Co., 10- Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Shaligram Complex, Estate, 2nd Floor, M. G. Bhupendra Road, Opp. Road, Diwanpara Police Chowki, Rajkot - 360001 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.:AAMPL3903F (Assessee) (Respo…

ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi vs. Lizer Cylinders Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed as indicated above

ITA 7283/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekita No:- 7283/Del/2017 (Assessment Year- 2013-14) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Lizer Cylinders Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. 205, 2Nd Floor, Samarpan, Central Circle-13, Chakala Link Road, New Delhi. Andheri East, Mumbai. Pan No: Aabcl3501H Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr) Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv., Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca & Shri Uma Shankar, Adv. & Madhur Aggarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 30.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 Order

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250(4)Section 68

…te a specific request, this Court is in agreement with the ITAT that his statement needs to be excluded and cannot be relied upon as a piece of evidence to make any addition. In fact the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (SC), 127 DTR 241 has held "...not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of theimpugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity inasmuch as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affe…

Parmjeet Singh Mogla, Mohali vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Mohali

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 853/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 148

…covered but that cannot be the evidence, solely on whose basis addition can be made. At this stage, we deem it appropriate to make reference to the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise 281 CTR 241 (S.C.) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme A.Y.2016-17 7 Court has propounded that if a witness was not put for cross-examination, then statement recorded against a person from his back will not be used in evidence. Para 6 of the judgement reads as under : “6. According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicatin…

ACIT, Central Circle - 2(2), Hyderabad vs. Amr India Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, Cross Objection No

ITA 535/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 And Cross Objection Nos.4 & 5/Hyd./2025 Arising out of ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 Assessment Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 The ACIT, AMR India Limited, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad. vs. Hyderabad. PAN AADCA3750D (Appellant/Respondent in C.O.) (Respondent/Cross Objector in C.O.) For Revenue : MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR For Revenue : CA Ritu Kamal Kishore Date of Hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA…

ACIT, Central Circle - 2(2), Hyderabad vs. Amr India Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, Cross Objection No

ITA 534/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 And Cross Objection Nos.4 & 5/Hyd./2025 Arising out of ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 Assessment Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 The ACIT, AMR India Limited, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad. vs. Hyderabad. PAN AADCA3750D (Appellant/Respondent in C.O.) (Respondent/Cross Objector in C.O.) For Revenue : MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR For Revenue : CA Ritu Kamal Kishore Date of Hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA…

Mohit Gupta HUF, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 44(6), Delhi

ITA 2511/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…tion of principle 99 | P a g e 100 ITA Nos. 2713-2714/Del/2023; ITA Nos. 7,51,271/Del/2024 etc. Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. of natural justice. Reliance is placed upon the order of Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (SC) 62 Taxmann.com 3/52 GST 355 (SC). 10.25 Regarding the observation made in the assessment order and by CIT (A) that there is no credible evidence in support of advertisement expenses and the assessee does not maintain details, bills and vouchers, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee has furnished the copies of every invoice and the l…

ITO, Ward-2(1), Ludhiana vs. Ashwani Kumar Jain, Ludihana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1083/CHANDI/2024[2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Balbir Khanna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1083/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23 The ITO, Shri Ashwani Kumar Jain, Ward 2(1), Vs Prop. Sun Bright Hosiery, Ludhiana. #2753/4, Sunder Nagar, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABNPJ3798A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Balbir Khanna, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11.03.2…

Mahalaxmi Infracontract Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1702/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT DR & B.P. Srivastava
Section 10(2)(xv)Section 3(2)Section 3(3)Section 3(5)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.1577&1578/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Income Tax, B-21, Corporate House, Opp. Central Circle-1(4), Pakwan-II, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380054 [PAN No.AAGCM4615E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.1702/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 816-817, Binori B Square-III, Income Tax, Nr. Tradebulls, Sindhu Bhavan Cen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Mahalaxmi Infracontract Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1578/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT DR & B.P. Srivastava
Section 10(2)(xv)Section 3(2)Section 3(3)Section 3(5)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.1577&1578/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Income Tax, B-21, Corporate House, Opp. Central Circle-1(4), Pakwan-II, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380054 [PAN No.AAGCM4615E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.1702/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 816-817, Binori B Square-III, Income Tax, Nr. Tradebulls, Sindhu Bhavan Cen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle) -1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Mahalaxmi Infracontract Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1577/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT DR & B.P. Srivastava
Section 10(2)(xv)Section 3(2)Section 3(3)Section 3(5)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.1577&1578/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Income Tax, B-21, Corporate House, Opp. Central Circle-1(4), Pakwan-II, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380054 [PAN No.AAGCM4615E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.1702/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mahalaxmi Infracontract Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 816-817, Binori B Square-III, Income Tax, Nr. Tradebulls, Sindhu Bhavan Cen…

Raju Bugromal Varandani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 27 3 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5467/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 250

…nders, the required documents were never supplied to the assessee. In this regard, I place reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, 2015. 5 Raju Bugromal Varandani, Mumbai 281 CTR 241 (SC) and also on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in ITA No. 3646/MUM/2023 in the case of Kundan Raghuveer Vs. ITO wherein it was held as under: 18. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that there was a search action in the case of the builder Shri Kulin S Vora and in that case the builder has ac…