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.

How many judgments cite Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE?

1,335 judgments on BharatTax cite Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (281 CTR 241), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153C, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 69, Section 147.

Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (281 CTR 241)

Seema Tayal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1132/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT (DR)

Section 10Section 115BSection 68

…ne, then such a statement loses its credibility as primary evidence. On this point, before us Ld. Counsel has relied upon by various courts, including that of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241 has held as follows: “According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned 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…

Asha Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6483/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…nnot be primary evidence or material to nail the assessee and simply based on the statement no addition can be made. This has been held so by various courts, and also by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Tiimber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241 has held as follows: “According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned 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…

Namrata Sehgal Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6482/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…nnot be primary evidence or material to nail the assessee and simply based on the statement no addition can be made. This has been held so by various courts, and also by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Tiimber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241 has held as follows: “According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned 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…

Shruti Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6481/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…nnot be primary evidence or material to nail the assessee and simply based on the statement no addition can be made. This has been held so by various courts, and also by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Tiimber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241 has held as follows: “According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned 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…

Swati Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6480/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…nnot be primary evidence or material to nail the assessee and simply based on the statement no addition can be made. This has been held so by various courts, and also by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Tiimber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241 has held as follows: “According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned 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…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 752/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Central Circle-18, W-82A, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 153C

…nfrastructure (P) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) reported in 397 ITR 82. (b) Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (c) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) DCIT Vs. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, (d) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 11.9 That further, it was submitted that even the statement of Sh. S.K. Gupta so relied on by the Revenue, cannot be relied on, as Sh. Gupta had retracted the said statement by filing an affidavit dated 27.02.2009 (at pages 36 to 39 of PB – II) and further, in proceedings under section 153A of the Act, when learned CIT (A) remanded the matter ba…

Urmila Devi Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4136/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal, Before Shri G. D.Agrawal & Before Shri G. Before Shri G. D.Agrawal, D.Agrawal & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-DR

Section 12A

…ee and the assessee is also allowed an opportunity to cross-examine the said person. In support of this contention, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Andaman Timber Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II - 281 CTR 241. 5. Learned counsel further stated that as per Section 12AA(3), where a trust has been granted registration, it can be revoked by this Section only when the Commissioner is satisfied that the activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or the institution. That in thi…

Niranjan D. Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-6(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 980/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.980/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘ए’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सव"ी राजपाल यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "द"प कुमार के"डया, लेखा सद"य के सम"। BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.980/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Niranjan D. Agarwal The Dy.CIT बनाम/ Ashokumar S.Gupta & Co. Circle-6(1) Vs. Chartered Accountants Ahmedabad 203, New Cloth Market 1st Floor,Ahmedabad-380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADFPA 1858 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर…

Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 223/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 May 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna (JCIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…eing used against the assessee then the order passed by the Assessing Officer based on such statement is not sustainable in absence of cross examination. The 9 Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amdaman Timber Industries Vs CCE 127 DTR 241, while dealing with the issue of non-grant of opportunity to cross examine the witness has held as under: “5. We have heard Mr. Kavin Gulati, learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee, and Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, learned senior counsel who appeared for the Revenue. 6. According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witness…

Shakuntala Properties P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2381/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…T have unanimously held that it is clear cut violation of the principle of natural justice and hence assessment deserves to be quashed and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CIT (2015) 127 DTR 241 (SC); Shobit Goyal (HUF), ITA No. 2021/Del/2018 and Prabhatam vs. ACIT ITA No. 2525 of 2015 dated 28.3.2015. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards page no. 2 of the impugned order especially the ground no. 5, 6, and 7 which reproduced as under:- 5. The Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in making the addition without affordin…

Shakuntala Agencies P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2379/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…T have unanimously held that it is clear cut violation of the principle of natural justice and hence assessment deserves to be quashed and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CIT (2015) 127 DTR 241 (SC); Shobit Goyal (HUF), ITA No. 2021/Del/2018 and Prabhatam vs. ACIT ITA No. 2525 of 2015 dated 28.3.2015. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards page no. 2 of the impugned order especially the ground no. 5, 6, and 7 which reproduced as under:- 5. The Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in making the addition without affordin…

Ipl Realtors P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2378/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…T have unanimously held that it is clear cut violation of the principle of natural justice and hence assessment deserves to be quashed and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CIT (2015) 127 DTR 241 (SC); Shobit Goyal (HUF), ITA No. 2021/Del/2018 and Prabhatam vs. ACIT ITA No. 2525 of 2015 dated 28.3.2015. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards page no. 2 of the impugned order especially the ground no. 5, 6, and 7 which reproduced as under:- 5. The Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in making the addition without affordin…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 637/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 629/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 628/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 627/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 626/SRT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 625/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 624/SRT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.624 To 629 & 637/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 14-15 & 2008-09 M/S.Gopinath Gems, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 201, Siddharth Complex, Hira Baug, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. Varachha Road, Surat – 395 006. [Pan: Aahfg 5845 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah – CAFor Respondent: Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…dependent enquiry and has also not followed the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Gopinath Gems Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat/ITA No’s.624 to 629 & 637/SRT/2018, A.Y’s: 2009-10 to 14-15 & 08-09 Page 3 of 7 [281 CTR 241] as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of legal representative of late Laxmanbhai S Patel [327 ITR 290]. He further stated that furnishing of copies of material collected by Assessing Officer to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in section 142(3) which has not been done by the Revenue Authority. There…

Sh. Gauri Shankar Sharma, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ajmer

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 35/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…tunity of cross examination amount to violation of principle of natural justice, a serious flaw which makes the order null and void. 11. For this purpose, reliance can be placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries 281 CTR 241 wherein it was held that not allowing assessee to cross-examine witnesses by adjudicating authority though statements of those witnesses were made as basis of impugned order, amounted in serious flaw which made impugned order nullity as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice. The precise observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court…

Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE

What is Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE

Seema Tayal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

Asha Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

Namrata Sehgal Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

Shruti Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

Swati Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Urmila Devi Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), Lucknow

Niranjan D. Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-6(1), Ahmedabad

Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

Shakuntala Properties P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

Shakuntala Agencies P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

Ipl Realtors P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), New Delhi

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

M/S Gopinath Gems, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

Sh. Gauri Shankar Sharma, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ajmer