Anil Goel v. CIT

306 ITR 212High Court2008#3368 most cited

What is Anil Goel v. CIT authority for?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) must provide a speaking order, stating the points for determination, the decision, and the reasons for the decision, even when dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Anil Goel v CIT · section 250(6) · speaking order · CIT(A) ex-parte decision · non-prosecution of appeal · duty to decide on merits · legislative mandate

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 115BBESection 144

Issues it is cited on

section 44adsection 44asection 250(6)speaking ordersection 25limited scrutinyservice of noticesection 44section 115bbunexplained cash creditsection 115bsection 69a

Judgments citing Anil Goel v. CIT

Chakilam Ramanaiah, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 265/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad10 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 265/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Chakilam Ramanaiah Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 9(1) Pan:Aatpc4016H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Vvs Ankith राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt.Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate VVS AnkithFor Respondent: : Smt.Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 143(3)

…t evidences, it is assumed that the appellant does not have any explanation for the reasons given by the Assessing Officer to make additions and thus, by following the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Anil Goel vs. CIT (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P&H) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant without admitting additional evidences filed by the assessee to suppor…

M.P. Poonia, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Bikaner

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 389/JODH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2008-09
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 154Section 154(8)

…and the Supreme Court. He has confirmed assessment order, passed without issuing notice u/s 143(2), after filing the return u/s 148. 4. The CIT (A) has rejected the application relying on the irrelevant decision of the P&H High Court in Anil Goel Vs. CIT(A), 306 ITR 212. 5. The CIT(A) has erred in not deleting the addition of Rs. 1,18,000/- made on account of alleged low house hold withdrawal, in spite of the fact that the CIT (A) at page 21 and 22 of the appeal order dated 27.9.2018 and in para 2 (5) at page 3 and 4 of the appeal order dated 22.10.2019, has accepted/not disputed that against the estimated house…

Savitri Srirangam, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 50(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1588/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Savitri Srirangam, Vs Acit, Sriram’S Ias Tower, 10-B, Circle-50(1), Pusa Road, Bada Bazar Marg, New Delhi. Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-110060. Pan-Bkdps6606Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sombir Kumar, Fca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

Section 139Section 250

…efore, it is assumed that the appellant is not interested in pursuing his own appeal. Moreover, the appellant failed to bring on records any facts or documents which can explain how the order of the AO is erroneous. 5.4 In the case of Anil Goel Vs CIT, [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon'ble High Court held as under. "4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through…

Chiragbhai S. Gadhiya, Surat vs. I.T.O., Ward-3(2)(6), Surat

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 240/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Chiragbhai S. Gadhiya, I.T.O., 79, Mani Nagar Society, Nana Ward-3(2)(6), Vs. Varachha, Nr. Sarthana Jakat Naka, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Ajypg 7927 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…ly as given before the Assessing Officer that he received cash from various persons which was not accepted by ld. 7 Chiragbhai S. Gadhiya Vs ITO CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Anil Goel Vs CIT (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P&H), in the said case, it was held that when the assessee was given ample opportunity to make submission by appearing in person or through authorised person, no one had put in appearance nor justifiable reason for adjournment was given. Thus, there was no justification and upheld the addition. Against the specific grounds of appeal about reject…

Band Begam, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 247/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 234ASection 69A

…Therefore, it is assumed that the appellant is not interested in pursuing his own appeal. Moreover, the appellant failed to bring on records any facts or documents which can explain how the order of the AO is erroneous. In the case of Anil Goel Vs CIT, [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon'ble High Court held as under. "4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through…

Creative Propmart Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Udaipur

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

ITA 117/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur14 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 68

…herefore, it is assumed that the appellant is not interested in pursuing his own appeal. Moreover, the appellant failed to bring on records any facts or documents which can explain how the order of the AO is erroneous. In the case of Anil Goel Vs CIT, [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon'ble High Court held as under: "4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through…

Raju Devi Saini, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 4(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed ‘’

ITA 411/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 148Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 411/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Smt. Raju Devi Saini The ITO 384, Modiyala Ki Dhani, Sikar Road, Vs. Ward 4(2) Jodla Power House, Jaipur- 302 013 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AUDPS 9958 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.L. Yadav, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl.…

Abhishek Modi, Indore vs. The ITO 2 (1), Indore

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

ITA 415/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 44ASection 69A

…Therefore, it is assumed that the appellant is not interested in pursuing his own appeal. Moreover, the appellant failed to bring on records any facts or documents which can explain how the order of the AO is erroneous. In the case of Anil Goel Vs CIT. [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon'ble High Court held as under: "4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through…

M/S Ranwa Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., 4, D-Villa, Station Road, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 329/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…g. Therefore, it is assumed that the appellant is not interest in pursuing his own appeal. Moreover, the appellant failed to bring on records any facts or documents which can explain how the order of the AO is erroneous. In the case of Anil Goel vs CIT [2008] 306 ITR 212 (Punjab & Haryana), the Hon’ble High Court held as under:- ‘’4. It is thus obvious on the plain language of Section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice alongwith notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by applying in person or through…

Sri Hari Shanker Mishra, Allahabad vs. ACIT-III, Mirzapur

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

ITA 212/ALLD/2017[2006-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 May 2022AY 2006-17

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2006-07 V. Assistant Commissioner Of Sri. Hari Shankar Mishra, 91-A, Alopibagh, Allahabad, U.P Income Tax-Iii, Mirzapur Pan-Advpm9244N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Utkarsh Gupta, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.06.2022

For Appellant: Mr. Utkarsh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…erstand the grievances arising from the grounds of appeal. Even though, I am not required to give separate reasons for confirming the order of the Assessing Officer as per the ratio of the judgment in the case of Anil Goel vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P&H). xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The A.O. in the order has elaborately discussed this issues and no infirmity is found in the order. No material has been produced by the appellant to show that the order of the A…

District Mining Officer, District Magistrate Office, Mines Division, Allahabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Allahabad Range, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 182/ALLD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 272A(2)(k)

…ns made by the appellant. The exorbitant liability and demand fastened upon the appellant even without perusing the entire material available on record. 12. Because, the ratio laid down in the case of Anil Goel Vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana reported in (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P & H) relied upon by the court below is not applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case particularly in view of the fact that the appellant has specifically denied the amount deposited in the name of the appellant. 13. Because, the ratio decidendi laid down by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Jitendra…

District Mining Officer, District Magistrate, Office, Mines Division, Allahabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Allahabad Range, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 181/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 272A(2)(k)

…ns made by the appellant. The exorbitant liability and demand fastened upon the appellant even without perusing the entire material available on record. 12. Because, the ratio laid down in the case of Anil Goel Vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana reported in (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P & H) relied upon by the court below is not applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case particularly in view of the fact that the appellant has specifically denied the amount deposited in the name of the appellant. 13. Because, the ratio decidendi laid down by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Jitendra…

District Mining Officer, District Magistrate Office, Mines Division, Allahabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Allahabad Range, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 180/ALLD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 272A(2)(k)

…ns made by the appellant. The exorbitant liability and demand fastened upon the appellant even without perusing the entire material available on record. 12. Because, the ratio laid down in the case of Anil Goel Vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana reported in (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P & H) relied upon by the court below is not applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case particularly in view of the fact that the appellant has specifically denied the amount deposited in the name of the appellant. 13. Because, the ratio decidendi laid down by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Jitendra…

District Mining Officer, District Magistrate, Allahabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 179/ALLD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 272A(2)(k)

…ns made by the appellant. The exorbitant liability and demand fastened upon the appellant even without perusing the entire material available on record. 12. Because, the ratio laid down in the case of Anil Goel Vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana reported in (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P & H) relied upon by the court below is not applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case particularly in view of the fact that the appellant has specifically denied the amount deposited in the name of the appellant. 13. Because, the ratio decidendi laid down by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Jitendra…

District Mining Officer, District Magistrate Office, Mines Division, Allahabad vs. JCIT(TDS), Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 178/ALLD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 272A(2)(k)

…ns made by the appellant. The exorbitant liability and demand fastened upon the appellant even without perusing the entire material available on record. 12. Because, the ratio laid down in the case of Anil Goel Vs. CIT (Appeals-I), Ludhiana reported in (2008) 306 ITR 212 (P & H) relied upon by the court below is not applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case particularly in view of the fact that the appellant has specifically denied the amount deposited in the name of the appellant. 13. Because, the ratio decidendi laid down by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Jitendra…