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 367,194 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

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Apeejay Shipping Ltd

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITA/26/2021HC Calcutta08 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…ressed into service to support the contention that on the date when the assessee had purchased the shares there was no allegation against the 44 (2008) 14 SCC 151 45 (2009) 2 SCC 192 46 (2015) 324 ELT 641 (SC) 47 (1980) Supplementary SCC 660 48 (2002) (143) ELT 25 (SC) 49 (2007) 1 SCC 781 50 (2016) 93 VST 326 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 51 of 150 company or the stock broker or any other person and therefore any investigation done subsequently cannot work prejudice to the assessee who is a genuine investor. 25. It is su…

DCIT, Central-2, Indore vs. M/S Venus Enterprises, Indore

ITA 727/IND/2018[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

Section 153A

…. Thus, the Assessing Officer ignored the same leading to violations of principles of Natural Justice which is unjustified in view of the 11 Ajitnath Reality and others SS 14 of 2017 and others ratio laid down in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs CCE 281 CTR 241 (SC), wherein it was held as under:- “Not allowing assessee to cross-examine witness by Adjudication Authority through state men soft house witness were made abases impugned order amounted in serious flaw which making impugned order nullity a sit amounted to violation of principles of natural justice.” The identical ratio was laid down in the fo…

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. M/S. Venus Enterprises, Indore

ITA 127/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

Section 153A

…. Thus, the Assessing Officer ignored the same leading to violations of principles of Natural Justice which is unjustified in view of the 11 Ajitnath Reality and others SS 14 of 2017 and others ratio laid down in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs CCE 281 CTR 241 (SC), wherein it was held as under:- “Not allowing assessee to cross-examine witness by Adjudication Authority through state men soft house witness were made abases impugned order amounted in serious flaw which making impugned order nullity a sit amounted to violation of principles of natural justice.” The identical ratio was laid down in the fo…

Kamlesh Gupta, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 13(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1462/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Kamlesh Gupta Dy. Commissioner Of 59, Mount Unique 62-A, Vs. Income-Tax (13)(3)(1) Peddar Road, Room No. 229, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 026 M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Aegpg6788R

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kanandan, D.R
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d for full legible copies of the statements of all the 32 parties that were relied upon by the A.O. Our aforesaid view is fortified by 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). In its aforesaid judgment, it was observed by the Hon‟ble Apex Court that not allowing the assessee to cross-examine witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though statements of those witnesses were made as basis of the impugned order amounted to a serious flaw which rendered the impugned order nullity as it amounted to violation of princip…

A.C.I.T., Circle-36, Kolkata vs. M/S Rohit & Co., Kolkata

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

ITA 1427/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey

Section 131

…M/s. Rohit & Co., AYs 2009-10 & 2011-12 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos. 1425 & 1427/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 ACIT, Circle-36, Kolkata Vs. M/s. Rohit & Co. (PAN: AADFR3190D) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 06.10.2021 Date of Pronouncement 28.10.2021 For the Appellant Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT For the Respondent Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate ORDER Per Bench: Both these appeals are preferred by the revenue which are…

A.C.I.T., Circle-36, Kolkata vs. M/S Rohit & Co., Kolkata

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

ITA 1425/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey

Section 131

…M/s. Rohit & Co., AYs 2009-10 & 2011-12 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos. 1425 & 1427/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 ACIT, Circle-36, Kolkata Vs. M/s. Rohit & Co. (PAN: AADFR3190D) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 06.10.2021 Date of Pronouncement 28.10.2021 For the Appellant Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT For the Respondent Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate ORDER Per Bench: Both these appeals are preferred by the revenue which are…

Shri.B.H.Basha, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1375/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Roumvan Paite, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 69Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 Assessment year : 2008-09 to 2011-12 Shri B.H Basha, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- Prop. M/s Bahar Films, tax, No.18, 13th Cross, Central Circle-1(4), Jayamahal Extension, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 046. PAN – AEBPB 0242 C APPELANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri B.S Balachandra, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Roumvan Paite, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 01.10.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accou…

DCIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. M/S. Dangayach Hotels Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 33/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Oct 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A) &For Respondent: Shri B. K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 33/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 cuke Deputy Commissioner of M/s Dangayach Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax, C-59, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Central Circle-1, Jaipur Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCC 7176 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 03/JP/2020 (Arising out of ITA No. 33/JP/2020) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Ass…

Sarthak Real Built Pvt. Ltd, Indore vs. Dy, CIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 819/IND/2017[14-15--26Q/Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING ITA No.359 & 284/Ind/2017 & ITANo.819/Ind/2018 Assessment Year 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN :AAACF2726K : Appellant V/s DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Respondent ITANo.439/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2009-10 DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Appellant V/s Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN : AAACF2726K : Responde…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 1 (1), Indore vs. M/S Ferro Concreate Construction (India) Pvt. Ltd Indore, Indore

ITA 439/IND/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING ITA No.359 & 284/Ind/2017 & ITANo.819/Ind/2018 Assessment Year 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN :AAACF2726K : Appellant V/s DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Respondent ITANo.439/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2009-10 DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Appellant V/s Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN : AAACF2726K : Responde…

M/S. Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1), Indore

ITA 359/IND/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING ITA No.359 & 284/Ind/2017 & ITANo.819/Ind/2018 Assessment Year 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN :AAACF2726K : Appellant V/s DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Respondent ITANo.439/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2009-10 DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Appellant V/s Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN : AAACF2726K : Responde…

M/S. Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The Pr.CIT-1, Indore

ITA 284/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING ITA No.359 & 284/Ind/2017 & ITANo.819/Ind/2018 Assessment Year 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN :AAACF2726K : Appellant V/s DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Respondent ITANo.439/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2009-10 DCIT-(Circle)-1(1) Indore : Appellant V/s Ferro Concrete Con. India Pvt. Ltd. 3/5/7-B, Bhagirathpura, Indore PAN : AAACF2726K : Responde…

Shri Satyaveer Singh, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Wadr-1, Bharatpur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 975/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 975/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2010-11 Satyaveer Singh, Cuke I.T.O., S/O- Sh. Roop Singh, Vill-Barso, Vs. Ward-1, Bharatpur (Raj)-321001. Bharatpur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Cmbps 4345 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashish Sharma (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Alwar Dated 28/03/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. That The Notice Issued U/S 147 Is Per Se Illegal, Arbitrary & Ab-Initio Void & Invalid & Therefore Deserve To Be Quashed & Annulled. 2. That The Assessment Order Dated 26/12/2017 Is Per Se Illegal & Invalid. 3. That The A.O. & Cit(A), Alwar Has Grossly Erred In Treating The Amount Of Rs. 12,22,000/- As Unexplained Money & Making An Addition Of Rs. 12,22,000/- U/S 69A..”

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Sharma (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

…not to be made and if made is null and void. Moreover, the cross examination was not allowed and therefore the addition deserves to be deleted in view of the settled position of law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Products V. CCE (281 CTR 241). 11 ITA 975/JP/2019_ Satyaveer Singh Vs ITO 14. That the statements of co-owners have not been considered by the Assessing Officer while making the addition. The co-owners have during the course of assessment have stated on oath wherein in response to question no. 8 Ajeet Singh (paper book page no. 6) has stated that his share of receipts have…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Shri Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1298/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (PCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES ‘B’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1190/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2011-12 cuke Shri Prakash Chand Kothari DCIT, Vs. B-4A, Kothari House, Prithviraj Road, Central Circle-02, C- Scheme, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAPBK2884R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1298/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2011-12 cuke T…

Shri Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1190/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (PCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES ‘B’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1190/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2011-12 cuke Shri Prakash Chand Kothari DCIT, Vs. B-4A, Kothari House, Prithviraj Road, Central Circle-02, C- Scheme, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAPBK2884R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1298/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2011-12 cuke T…

Manthan Inc, Mumbai vs. ACIT- Cir 19(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2942/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Dilip DiwanFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma
Section 35A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई "ी "वकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 2942/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2012-13) Manthan Inc. Room No.3, 1st Floor, Rani Building, 271, V.P. Road, Prarthna Samaj, Mumbai-400004. ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant PAN: AAKFM6011D बनाम Vs. ACIT Circle-19(2) R.No. 207, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007. ..... "ितवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant by : Sh. Dilip Diwan "ितवाद" "ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Smita Verma सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 20/07/2021 घोषणा क" ितिथ/…

Shri Bhupinder Kumar Sekhari, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1767/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

…ailable to assessee for rebuttal nor any opportunity to cross - examine has been provided by the lower authorities, even though the same was specifically requested before the learned CIT(A). In this regard, reliance is placed on following case laws: a) [2015] 127 DTR 241 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries VS. CCE b) 258 ITR 317 (Del) United Electricals vs. CIT c) [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT d) IT (SS) A. No. 12/D/07 Shri RadheyShyam Bansal vs ACIT e) IT( SS) No. 233 and 234/D/2006 dated 19.09.2008 Shri Manit Gulati and Sandeep Gulati f) 109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirme…

Smt Pooja Sekhari, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1766/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

…ailable to assessee for rebuttal nor any opportunity to cross - examine has been provided by the lower authorities, even though the same was specifically requested before the learned CIT(A). In this regard, reliance is placed on following case laws: a) [2015] 127 DTR 241 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries VS. CCE b) 258 ITR 317 (Del) United Electricals vs. CIT c) [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT d) IT (SS) A. No. 12/D/07 Shri RadheyShyam Bansal vs ACIT e) IT( SS) No. 233 and 234/D/2006 dated 19.09.2008 Shri Manit Gulati and Sandeep Gulati f) 109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirme…

Shri Gaurav Sekhari, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1765/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

…ailable to assessee for rebuttal nor any opportunity to cross - examine has been provided by the lower authorities, even though the same was specifically requested before the learned CIT(A). In this regard, reliance is placed on following case laws: a) [2015] 127 DTR 241 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries VS. CCE b) 258 ITR 317 (Del) United Electricals vs. CIT c) [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT d) IT (SS) A. No. 12/D/07 Shri RadheyShyam Bansal vs ACIT e) IT( SS) No. 233 and 234/D/2006 dated 19.09.2008 Shri Manit Gulati and Sandeep Gulati f) 109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirme…

Shri Bhupinder Kumar Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5378/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

…ailable to assessee for rebuttal nor any opportunity to cross - examine has been provided by the lower authorities, even though the same was specifically requested before the learned CIT(A). In this regard, reliance is placed on following case laws: a) [2015] 127 DTR 241 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries VS. CCE b) 258 ITR 317 (Del) United Electricals vs. CIT c) [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT d) IT (SS) A. No. 12/D/07 Shri RadheyShyam Bansal vs ACIT e) IT( SS) No. 233 and 234/D/2006 dated 19.09.2008 Shri Manit Gulati and Sandeep Gulati f) 109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. vs DCIT affirme…