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

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

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

ITA 5377/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

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…

M/S. Keerthi International Products Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5375/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

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…

M/S. Nova Infratech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5364/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…

Smt. Shobha Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5362/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

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. Puja Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5361/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…

Smt. Puja Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5360/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

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…

Sh. Kapil Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5315/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…

Sh. Kapil Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5314/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

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. Aarti Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5313/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…

Smt. Aarti Sekhri, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5312/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

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…

Pr Commissioner of Income vs. M/S Janson Investments

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/471/2017HC Karnataka27 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 143Section 158BSection 260Section 69C

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.471/2017 BETWEEN : 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(5), BENGALURU. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI SANMATHI E.I., ADV.) AND : M/S JANSON INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., NO.75-76, COMMERCIAL STREET, BANGALORE, PAN : AAACJ2892C. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI A.SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI BHAIRAV KUT…

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in (ITA No

ITA 1503/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1503/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. Of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1461/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), C/O. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri Himashu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1503/AHD/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFAPM8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1461/AHD/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), C/o. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahi…

Deepak S. Mehta, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in (ITA No

ITA 1461/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1503/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. Of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1461/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), C/O. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri Himashu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1503/AHD/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFAPM8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1461/AHD/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), C/o. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahi…

Smt Manorama Singhal, Indore vs. ITO-3(2), Indore

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITANo

ITA 130/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Years: 2013-14

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

…. Reliance was placed on following decisions: i. C. Vasantlal and Co. 45 ITR 206 (SC) ii. Kishan Chand Chellaram vs. CIT (125 ITR 713) iii. CIT, Central Jaipur vs. Smt. Sunita Dhadda iv. M/s. Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise 92015) 281 CTR 241(SC) 7. Per contra Ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the finding of both lower authorities. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. As regards ground No.1 to 3 challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings we find that there was Smt. Manorama Singhal specific information received by the ld.AO on…

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

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

…is also seen that the AO did not supply copy of such report, if any to the appellant during the assessment proceedings, so that the appellant can counter it. Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) has reaffirmed the principles of natural justice and held that the opportunity of cross examination of witness is must in a case where some adverse inference is to be drawn against the assesses. The AO failed to bring any corroborative evidence and also failed to give opportunity to rebut the report which is used as one of the basis of addit…

Shree Jainarayan Hariram Goel Charitable Trust, Raipur vs. Commissioner of I Ncome Tax ( Exemption), Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/RPR/2019[0]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Aug 2021

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 25/Rpr/2019) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : ) बनाम/ Shree Jainarayan Hariram Commissioner Of Goel Charitable Trust Income Tax Vs. Near Patidar Bhawan, New (Exemption), 2Nd Floor, Metro Walk Timber Market, Fafadih, Raipur (C.G.) Building, E-5, Arera Colony, Bhopal – 462016 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabhg3026M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Amit Maloo Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DR
Section 35(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RAIPUR” BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 25/RPR/2019) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : ) बनाम/ Shree Jainarayan Hariram Commissioner of Goel Charitable Trust Income Tax Vs. Near Patidar Bhawan, New (Exemption), 2nd Floor, Metro Walk Timber Market, Fafadih, Raipur (C.G.) Building, E-5, Arera Colony, Bhopal – 462016 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABHG3026M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Amit Maloo Jain, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से…

Mesers Supertech Forgings(India) Pvt.Ltd., Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 563/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 147

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar Before: Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member ITA Nos.563/Asr/2018 Assessment Year 2010-11 M/s SupertechForgings (India) Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dy.CIT, Circle- IV. Vill.Raowali,PathankotRoad, Jalandhar Jalandhar Pan No.AACCS0402M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rohit Kapoor CA and Veer Sain Aggarwal Adv Respondent by Sh. Rajinder Kaur CIT DR Date of Hearing 15.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement 25.08.2021 ORDER Per, Dr. M. L. MEENA, A. M.: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the l…

M/S. Balmukund Dhanraj Jhawar HUF, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 250/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…eus is no way connected with such Investigation Wing of Kolkata neither any opportunity of cross-examination has been rendered to the assessee. He has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE reported in, 281 CTR 241 (SC) in this regard. No documentary proof has been provided by the Revenue to show that cash was given by the appellant for obtaining cheques on account of sale of shares and therefore, in the absence of any evidence contrary to the exempt long-term capital gain as claimed under Section 10(38) by 5 M/s Ajay Kumar Balmukund Jhawar-HUF ITA No.244,…

Smt. Aparna Jhawar, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 249/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…eus is no way connected with such Investigation Wing of Kolkata neither any opportunity of cross-examination has been rendered to the assessee. He has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE reported in, 281 CTR 241 (SC) in this regard. No documentary proof has been provided by the Revenue to show that cash was given by the appellant for obtaining cheques on account of sale of shares and therefore, in the absence of any evidence contrary to the exempt long-term capital gain as claimed under Section 10(38) by 5 M/s Ajay Kumar Balmukund Jhawar-HUF ITA No.244,…

Shri Gaurav Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 247/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…us is no way connected with such Investigation Wing of Kolkata neither any opportunity of cross-examination has been rendered to the assessee. He has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE reported in, 281 CTR 241 (SC) in this regard. No documentary proof has been provided by the Revenue to show that cash was given by the appellant for obtaining cheques on account of sale of shares and therefore, in the absence of any evidence contrary to the exempt long- term capital gain as claimed under Section 10(38) by the assessee 6 Shri Vrindavan Tayal ITA No.242/I…