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 367,368 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

M.K Rajendran Pillai, Pathanamthitta vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 581/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

…e copies of statement were never confronted to the assessee and no opportunity of cross-examination was ever provided to the assessee. ITA Nos.580 to 586/Coch/2022 Accordingly, the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (62 Taxmann.com 3) would apply to the facts of the case and support the case of the assessee. Considering the same, no much weightage could be given to such statements and the same, on standalone basis, would not be sufficient to support the impugned additions. 7.8 In the last legal ground, the assessee has contested the impugned additions on the ground that…

M.K Rajendran Pillai, Pathanamthitta vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 580/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

…e copies of statement were never confronted to the assessee and no opportunity of cross-examination was ever provided to the assessee. ITA Nos.580 to 586/Coch/2022 Accordingly, the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (62 Taxmann.com 3) would apply to the facts of the case and support the case of the assessee. Considering the same, no much weightage could be given to such statements and the same, on standalone basis, would not be sufficient to support the impugned additions. 7.8 In the last legal ground, the assessee has contested the impugned additions on the ground that…

M/S Manthan Inc, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Circle, 19(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2664/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Manthan Inc, ACIT Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. PAN No. AAKFM 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR Revenue by : Smt. Mahita Nair, DR : Date of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date of pronouncement 19/01/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders both dated 26.09.2022 passed by the…

M/S Manthan Inc, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Circle, 19(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2663/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Manthan Inc, ACIT Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. PAN No. AAKFM 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR Revenue by : Smt. Mahita Nair, DR : Date of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date of pronouncement 19/01/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders both dated 26.09.2022 passed by the…

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

…he assessee for giving aiso an opportunity to cross examine the third party. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber examine the third party. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs.\ Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) has Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) has Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) has reaffirmed the' principles of natural justice and held that the opportunity of cross reaffirmed the' principles of natural justice and held that the opportunity of cross reaffirmed the' principles of natural justice and h…

Srichand Chaturmal HUF, Mumbai vs. The ACIT 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2334/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2334/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srichand Chatrumal Huf बिधम/ Acit-17(2) 5-B, Elegant Apartment, 3 Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Sobhani Road, Colaba, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Mumbai-400005. 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahs9693F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6537/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Mrs. Rashmi Sukesh Malik Ito, Ward-16(1)(2) बिधम/ Alias Of Jyoti Srichand Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bathija Mumbai-400020. 5B, Elegant Apartment, 3, Sobhani Road, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai- 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapb6002D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hari Raheja Revenue By: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee’S Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 25.10.2021 For The Assessment Year 2014-15; & That Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-04, Mumbai Dated 25.09.2018 For Ay. 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 148

…mal HUF/Mrs. Rashmi Sukesh Malik fully given to assessee; and thirdly assessee has not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the maker of such statement on the basis of which the investigation report has been made [refer case of Andaman Timber Industries 127 DTR 241) (SC)] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the assessment based on third party statement without giving an opportunity to the assessee to cross- examine the maker of adverse statement is not sustainable in law. Thus, anyway the investigation report based on third party statement cannot be the basis to draw adverse inference against th…

Mrs.Rashmi Sukesh Malik Alias of Jyoti Srichand Bathija, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 16(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6537/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2334/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srichand Chatrumal Huf बिधम/ Acit-17(2) 5-B, Elegant Apartment, 3 Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Sobhani Road, Colaba, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Mumbai-400005. 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahs9693F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6537/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Mrs. Rashmi Sukesh Malik Ito, Ward-16(1)(2) बिधम/ Alias Of Jyoti Srichand Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bathija Mumbai-400020. 5B, Elegant Apartment, 3, Sobhani Road, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai- 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapb6002D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hari Raheja Revenue By: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee’S Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 25.10.2021 For The Assessment Year 2014-15; & That Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-04, Mumbai Dated 25.09.2018 For Ay. 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 148

…mal HUF/Mrs. Rashmi Sukesh Malik fully given to assessee; and thirdly assessee has not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the maker of such statement on the basis of which the investigation report has been made [refer case of Andaman Timber Industries 127 DTR 241) (SC)] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the assessment based on third party statement without giving an opportunity to the assessee to cross- examine the maker of adverse statement is not sustainable in law. Thus, anyway the investigation report based on third party statement cannot be the basis to draw adverse inference against th…

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Anshuman Ramdayalji Kumawat, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 22/SRT/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…rther seen that the ld. AO has not made any independent enquiries of his own. Rajesh Kr. Pamecha, Mukesh M. Sen, Anshuman M. Kumawat He has just relied on the report of Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Mart (281 CTR 241) has categorically held that not furnishing the copy of material proposed to be relied upon, to the assessee invalidates the assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Legal Representatives of late Laxmanbhai S Patel (327 ITR 290) also emphasizes the same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO t…

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Anshuman Ramdayalji Kumawat, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 21/SRT/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…rther seen that the ld. AO has not made any independent enquiries of his own. Rajesh Kr. Pamecha, Mukesh M. Sen, Anshuman M. Kumawat He has just relied on the report of Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Mart (281 CTR 241) has categorically held that not furnishing the copy of material proposed to be relied upon, to the assessee invalidates the assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Legal Representatives of late Laxmanbhai S Patel (327 ITR 290) also emphasizes the same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO t…

ITO, Ward 2(3)(8), Surat vs. Mukesh Mahavirprasad Sen, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 16/SRT/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…rther seen that the ld. AO has not made any independent enquiries of his own. Rajesh Kr. Pamecha, Mukesh M. Sen, Anshuman M. Kumawat He has just relied on the report of Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Mart (281 CTR 241) has categorically held that not furnishing the copy of material proposed to be relied upon, to the assessee invalidates the assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Legal Representatives of late Laxmanbhai S Patel (327 ITR 290) also emphasizes the same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO t…

ITO, Ward 2(3)(8), Surat vs. Mukesh Mahavirprasad Sen, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 15/SRT/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…rther seen that the ld. AO has not made any independent enquiries of his own. Rajesh Kr. Pamecha, Mukesh M. Sen, Anshuman M. Kumawat He has just relied on the report of Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Mart (281 CTR 241) has categorically held that not furnishing the copy of material proposed to be relied upon, to the assessee invalidates the assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Legal Representatives of late Laxmanbhai S Patel (327 ITR 290) also emphasizes the same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO t…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(8), Surat vs. Shri Rajesh Kumar Pamecha, Ajmer

In the result the ground No

ITA 87/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

…rther seen that the ld. AO has not made any independent enquiries of his own. Rajesh Kr. Pamecha, Mukesh M. Sen, Anshuman M. Kumawat He has just relied on the report of Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Mart (281 CTR 241) has categorically held that not furnishing the copy of material proposed to be relied upon, to the assessee invalidates the assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Legal Representatives of late Laxmanbhai S Patel (327 ITR 290) also emphasizes the same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO t…

M/S. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalroe vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

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

ITA 533/BANG/2022[N/A]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 269S

…ITA No.533/Bang/2022 M/s. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: N.A. M/s. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, 13-2-115, Hotel Srinivas Building Vs. The Principal CIT (Central) GHS Road Bengaluru Mangalore 575 001 PAN NO : AAJTS9362G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent by : Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 26.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 30.12.20…

DCIT CC, -7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Glamour Health Care Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenueis dismissed

ITA 2252/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaldy.Cit, Cc-7(2), Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Glamour Health Care Pvt. Ltd. 4 Kiran Villa, 34, Ram Mandir Road, Danda, Khar (West), Mumbai-400052. Pan: Aaacn2617F ..... Respondent Appellant/Revenue By : Sh. Rakesh Garg, Cit-Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/12/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-49, Mumbai [For Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’] Vide Order Dated 24.08.2021 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Rakesh Garg, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dy.CIT, CC-7(2), Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ...... Appellant Vs. M/s Glamour Health Care Pvt. Ltd. 4 Kiran Villa, 34, Ram Mandir Road, Danda, Khar (West), Mumbai-400052. PAN: AAACN2617F ..... Respondent Appellant/Revenue by : Sh. Rakesh Garg, CIT-DR Respondent/Assessee by : Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, AR Date of hearing : 22/09/2022 Date of pronouncement : 19/12/2022 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by Revenue is directed against the orde…

Shreyansh Bothra, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 115/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.115/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shreyansh Bothra H. No.75, Hospital Ward, Pachperi Naka, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan : Btdpb2233D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bhilai (C.G). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 148Section 56

…verse inferences in the hands of the assessee by acting upon the same. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. AR had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC). It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that not allowing the assessee to cross-examine a witness by the adjudicating authority would tantamount a serious flaw which would render the impugned order as nullity and void. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’) relied on the orders of th…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore vs. Mr. Shorff Krishnarajasetty Satheesha, Kodagu

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

ITA 997/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, AM ITA No.997/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 The Assistant Commissioner of Sri.Shroff Krishnarajasetty Income-tax, Central Circle Satheesha, Kaveri Textiles v. Mysuru. Ratha Beedi, Mullusoge Kodagu – 571 234. PAN : ACRPs1937P. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR Respondent by : Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA Date of Pronouncement : 16.12.2022 Date of Hearing : 17.11.2022 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, AM : This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against…

Shri Kirit Kalidas Gajjar, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2444/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2444/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Shri Kirit Kalidas Gajjar, I.T.O, 1807, Pada Pole, Vs. Ward-1(1)(2), Gandhi Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380001. Pan: Abepg4967B

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…company for the purpose of making impugned addition. However, such account cannot be said to be conclusive evidence against the appellant unless, the AO has allowed the opportunity to cross examine the concerned party as held in case of Amdaman Timber Works.(281 CTR 241) (SC) it is held as under: 17.3 However, the vital fact is this that no such opportunity was afforded to the assessee by the authorities below except providing the copy of the ledger and the information about the disclosure made by the search party before the settlement commission. To our understanding, it is the fundamental right of the assesse…

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir-6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Dilip B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objections for AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14

ITA 2349/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…disadvantage of the assessee, since it would be fragile for violation of the principles of natural justice. In this regard, we may gainfully refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE reported in (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) wherein it has been held that, failure to give the assessee the opportunity to cross examine witness, whose statements are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity. We also gainfully refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Buil…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir.-2, Surat vs. Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA nos

ITA 195/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.110/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.195/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, Ar Assessee By Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/11/2022

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.110/SRT/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFHPB0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.195/SRT/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The DCIT, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar road, Mota Varachha, Surat-…

Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir., 2, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA nos

ITA 110/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.110/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.195/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, Ar Assessee By Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/11/2022

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.110/SRT/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFHPB0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.195/SRT/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The DCIT, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar road, Mota Varachha, Surat-…