Anvar P.V v. P.K. Basheer

10 SCC 473Supreme Court of India2014#573 most cited

What is Anvar P.V v. P.K. Basheer authority for?

Electronic records are inadmissible in evidence unless accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.

169

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Anvar P.V v. P.K. Basheer · Section 65B · Indian Evidence Act · electronic record · admissibility of evidence · certificate requirement · secondary evidence

Sections most often in play

Section 65BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132(4)Section 69CSection 142(1)Section 69

Issues it is cited on

section 65(b)section 65b(4)section 65asection 90(3)place of effective managementsection 62section 6(3)section 132(5)section 127(1)illegal paymentsection 65bsection 65

Judgments citing Anvar P.V v. P.K. Basheer

Vasireddy Vidya Sagar, Guntur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

ITA 525/VIZ/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon'Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon'Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.Τ.Α.Nos.524, 525 & 526/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vasireddy Vidya Sagar D.No. 5-37-44/2, Kalangi Complex 4/7, Brodipet, Guntur - 522002 [Pan: Agzps2420F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1 Income Tax Office Lakshmipuram Main Road Guntur - 522006 Andhra Pradesh (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By सुनवाई समाप्त होने की तिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : Shri Mv Prasad, Ca : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar 19.02.2025 07.03.2025 आदेश /Order Per Shri S Balakrishnan: 1. These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Different Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam – 3 [Hereinafter In Short "Ld.Cit(A)"] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below:-

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee's premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

Devender Kumar, Rohtak vs. ITO, Ward 1, Rohtak

ITA 2509/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi06 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…nd unless the conditions stated in section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are satisfied. 23.3 Further the counsel of the assessee relying on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court (Three Judge bench) in the case of Anvar V. Basheer, reported in (2014) 10 SCC 473 argued that the requisite certificate from an officer certifying that the print outs in question are from the seized electronic record/device is missing in the present case. 23.4 Further Ld. Counsel of the assessee highlighted that, there is no proof or evidence of the receipt of cash of Rs. 8 lacs as is being alleged. No enquiries have been con…

Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam, Hyderabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 500/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.496, 497, 498, 499 & 500/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1(1) D.No.8-2-293/82/A/1149 Income Tax Office Road No. 36 Lakshmipuram Main Road Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500033 Guntur – 522006 Telangana Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abipv2941A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee’s premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam, Hyderabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/VIZ/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.496, 497, 498, 499 & 500/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1(1) D.No.8-2-293/82/A/1149 Income Tax Office Road No. 36 Lakshmipuram Main Road Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500033 Guntur – 522006 Telangana Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abipv2941A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee’s premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam, Hyderabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.496, 497, 498, 499 & 500/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1(1) D.No.8-2-293/82/A/1149 Income Tax Office Road No. 36 Lakshmipuram Main Road Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500033 Guntur – 522006 Telangana Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abipv2941A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee’s premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam, Hyderabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.496, 497, 498, 499 & 500/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1(1) D.No.8-2-293/82/A/1149 Income Tax Office Road No. 36 Lakshmipuram Main Road Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500033 Guntur – 522006 Telangana Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abipv2941A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee’s premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam, Hyderabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 496/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.496, 497, 498, 499 & 500/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vemuluri Naga Bhushanam V. Dcit – Central Circle – 1(1) D.No.8-2-293/82/A/1149 Income Tax Office Road No. 36 Lakshmipuram Main Road Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500033 Guntur – 522006 Telangana Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abipv2941A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153C

…, Madurai [2021] 129 taxmann.com 126 (Madras) (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arjun PanditraoKhotkar vs. Kailash KushanraoGorantyal and Ors in Civil Appeal Nos. 20825-20826 of 2017. (iii) Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and others [2014] 10 SCC 473 (SC). 38. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted before that the Digital Evidence collection form was obtained from the assessee’s premises during the search operations. The Ld. DR also submitted that as per page 33 of the submissions, the system has been identified by the search party. Countering the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no evidence…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Shashi Mehta, New Delhi

ITA 271/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…nd unless the conditions stated in section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are satisfied. 23.3 Further the counsel of the assessee relying on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court (Three Judge bench) in the case of Anvar V. Basheer, reported in (2014) 10 SCC 473 argued that the requisite certificate from an officer certifying that the print outs in question are from the seized electronic record/device is missing in the present case. 23.4 Further Ld. Counsel of the assessee highlighted that, there is no proof or evidence of the receipt of cash of Rs. 8 lacs as is being alleged. No enquiries have been con…

ACIT CC -6(1), Mumbai, Bkc vs. Prashant Prakash Nilawar, Pnue

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5689/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane,CIT-DR and Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 65BSection 69ASection 69CSection 6C

…the image being an electronic record found from the mobile of Shri Javed Shaikh is not tenable. Prashant Prakash Nilawar, AY 20021-22 4.4. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer [2014] 10 SCC 473, who observed that wherever a person is seeking to rely upon an electronic record, for the same produced in the evidence, a certificate u/s.65B of the Indian Evidence Act is mandatory. Paragraph 14 from this judgement reads as under: "14. Any documentary evidence by way of an electronic record under the Evidence Act, in view of Sections 59 and 65-…

Prashant Prakash Nilawar, Pune vs. DCIT CC 6(1)-Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5073/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane,CIT-DR and Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 65BSection 69ASection 69CSection 6C

…the image being an electronic record found from the mobile of Shri Javed Shaikh is not tenable. Prashant Prakash Nilawar, AY 20021-22 4.4. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer [2014] 10 SCC 473, who observed that wherever a person is seeking to rely upon an electronic record, for the same produced in the evidence, a certificate u/s.65B of the Indian Evidence Act is mandatory. Paragraph 14 from this judgement reads as under: "14. Any documentary evidence by way of an electronic record under the Evidence Act, in view of Sections 59 and 65-…

Nimesh Umakant Manania, Mumbai vs. DCIT-20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6180/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Nimesh Umakant 6179/Mum/2024 2010-11 Manania, Deputy Commissioner of Flat No. 8A, Income Tax-20(1), Mont Blanc, 6178/Mum/2024 2011-12 406, Piramal Chambers, Jam-e-Jamshed Road, Lalbaugh, Parel, Matunga East, Mumbai. Mumbai 6180/Mum/2024 2012-13 PAN: AACPM0546K Assessee by : Shri Suchek Anchaliya Revenue by : Ms. Monika H. Pande Date of Hearing : 15/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24/01/2025 PER BENCH: All the three appeals fi…

Nimesh Umakant Manania, Mumbai vs. DCIT-20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6179/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Nimesh Umakant 6179/Mum/2024 2010-11 Manania, Deputy Commissioner of Flat No. 8A, Income Tax-20(1), Mont Blanc, 6178/Mum/2024 2011-12 406, Piramal Chambers, Jam-e-Jamshed Road, Lalbaugh, Parel, Matunga East, Mumbai. Mumbai 6180/Mum/2024 2012-13 PAN: AACPM0546K Assessee by : Shri Suchek Anchaliya Revenue by : Ms. Monika H. Pande Date of Hearing : 15/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24/01/2025 PER BENCH: All the three appeals fi…

Nimesh Umakant Manania, Mumbai vs. DCIT-20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6178/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Nimesh Umakant 6179/Mum/2024 2010-11 Manania, Deputy Commissioner of Flat No. 8A, Income Tax-20(1), Mont Blanc, 6178/Mum/2024 2011-12 406, Piramal Chambers, Jam-e-Jamshed Road, Lalbaugh, Parel, Matunga East, Mumbai. Mumbai 6180/Mum/2024 2012-13 PAN: AACPM0546K Assessee by : Shri Suchek Anchaliya Revenue by : Ms. Monika H. Pande Date of Hearing : 15/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24/01/2025 PER BENCH: All the three appeals fi…

Paramasivam Mahalingam, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

ITA 281/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…nd unless the conditions stated in section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are satisfied. 23.3 Further the counsel of the assessee relying on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court (Three Judge bench) in the case of Anvar V. Basheer, reported in (2014) 10 SCC 473 argued that the requisite certificate from an officer certifying that the print outs in question are from the seized electronic record/device is missing in the present case. 23.4 Further Ld. Counsel of the assessee highlighted that, there is no proof or evidence of the receipt of cash of Rs. 8 lacs as is being alleged. No enquiries have been con…

DCIT, Central Circle- 1(3), Pune, Income Tax vs. Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Maharashtra

ITA 1831/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…lement embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) iii) iv) v) vi) vii) viii) K.P Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.…

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1703/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…element embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) KP Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 iii) P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 iv) Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) v) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 vi) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) vii) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.3820 to…

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

ITA 1702/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…element embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) KP Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 iii) P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 iv) Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) v) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 vi) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) vii) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.3820 to…

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

ITA 1701/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…element embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) KP Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 iii) P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 iv) Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) v) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 vi) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) vii) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.3820 to…

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1700/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…element embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) KP Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 iii) P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 iv) Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) v) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 vi) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) vii) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.3820 to…

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1699/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…element embedded in such cash receipts should be brought to tax. For the above proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decisions cited before the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the following decisions: i) Answar PV v. B.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 ii) KP Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 7 Taxman 13 iii) P.R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 157 taxman 325 iv) Vetrivel Minerals vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 126 (Mad) v) SKM Animal Feeds and Foods (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 385 vi) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta (2008) 174 Taxman 476 (Del) vii) ACIT vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain vide ITA Nos.3820 to…