Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT

31 Taxmann.com 274High Court2013#704 most cited

What is Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT authority for?

An addition to income based on statements recorded during search operations under Section 132(4) is valid, and the assessee bears the burden of proving such statements incorrect to justify their deletion. The Assessing Officer can rely on such statements, a proposition affirmed by the Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP.

144

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT · Section 132(4) · Section 132 · statements recorded during search · evidentiary value of admission · retracted statement · burden of proof on assessee · addition based on statement · search assessment · SLP dismissed

Also reported as

351 ITR 143215 Taxmann 229

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 69CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 10(38)Section 148Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 282a(1)section 133(a)section 282aabatement of assessmentsection 153b(1)(a)section 148(1)time barred assessmentbona fide mistakesection 140aretracted statementsection 153(1)(a)purposive interpretation

Judgments citing Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT

SH. SANJAY JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2765/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Shri Sanjay Jain, Dcit, Cc-01, I-42, Ashok Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 Vs Pan-Aagpj1372G Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv. Shri Shyam Sunder, Adv. & Shri Dishant Seth, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2025

Section 132Section 132(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2011-12] Shri Sanjay Jain, DCIT, CC-01, I-42, Ashok Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 Vs PAN-AAGPJ1372G Assessee Revenue Assessee by Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv. Shri Shyam Sunder, Adv. & Shri Dishant Seth, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 29.09.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commis…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

ITA 189/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…hat in such a scenario the Id. assessing authority while determining the total income may also make addition on other issues even if not emanating from incriminating material found in search. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhagirath Aggarwal vs. CIT (351 ITR 143) (Delhi) held that an addition in assessee's income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without proving statements to be incorrect. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. M.S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) held that where in course of block assessment proceedings, AO made addition to ass…

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4593/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

…T [2015] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself hadstated in sworn statement during search and seizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admissionwithout scrutinizing documents. c. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in assessee’s income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was dismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013 thereby affirming the proposition that AO could rely on thesame. d. [2019]…

DCIT CC 5-1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED , MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4591/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

…T [2015] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself hadstated in sworn statement during search and seizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admissionwithout scrutinizing documents. c. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in assessee’s income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was dismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013 thereby affirming the proposition that AO could rely on thesame. d. [2019]…

DCIT CC 5 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4590/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
Section 250Section 69A

…15] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the\nHon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself\nhadstated in sworn statement during search and\nseizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to\nbe levied on the basis of admissionwithout\nscrutinizing documents.\nc. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs\nCIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in\nassessee’s income relying on statements recorded\nduring search operations cannot be deleted\nwithout provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was\ndismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013\nthereby affirming the proposition that AO could\nrely on thesame.\nd.…

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4153/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

…T [2015] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself hadstated in sworn statement during search and seizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admissionwithout scrutinizing documents. c. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in assessee’s income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was dismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013 thereby affirming the proposition that AO could rely on thesame. d. [2019]…

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4151/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

…T [2015] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself hadstated in sworn statement during search and seizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admissionwithout scrutinizing documents. c. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in assessee’s income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was dismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013 thereby affirming the proposition that AO could rely on thesame. d. [2019]…

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4150/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

…T [2015] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself hadstated in sworn statement during search and seizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admissionwithout scrutinizing documents. c. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in assessee’s income relying on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was dismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013 thereby affirming the proposition that AO could rely on thesame. d. [2019]…

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4148/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 250Section 69A

…15] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the\nHon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself\nhadstated in sworn statement during search and\nseizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to\nbe levied on the basis of admissionwithout\nscrutinizing documents.\nc. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs\nCIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in\nassessee’s income relying on statements recorded\nduring search operations cannot be deleted\nwithout provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was\ndismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013\nthereby affirming the proposition that AO could\nrely on thesame.\nd.…

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4147/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
Section 250Section 69A

…5] (doj: 02.07.2015)– It was held by the\nHon’ble Apex Court that since assessee himself\nhad stated in sworn statement during search and\nseizure about hisundisclosed income, tax was to\nbe levied on the basis of admissionwithout\nscrutinizing documents.\nc. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs\nCIT (doj: 22.01.2013): Itwas held that addition in\nassessee’s income relying on statements recorded\nduring search operations cannot be deleted\nwithout provingstatements to be incorrect. SLP was\ndismissed by Hon’ble SC vide CANo.16170/2013\nthereby affirming the proposition that AO could\nrely on thesame.\nd.…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5671/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

…be taken into consideration with regard to validity and evidentiary value of statement recorded u/s 132(4) of I.T. Act despite the retraction made in the return of income. 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi) 2. Bhagirath Aggarwal Vs CIT 351 ITR 143 3. CIT Vs M. S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) 4. ACIT Vs Hukum Chand Jain [2010] 191 Tasman 319 (Chhattisgarh) 5. Green view Restaurant Vs ACIT [2003] 133 Taxman 432 (Gauhati) 6. Raj Hans Towers (P) Ltd. Vs CIT 373 ITR9 7. PCIT Vs Avinash Kumar Setia [2017] 81 taxmann.com 476 (Delhi) 6. With this the ld. CIT DR submitted that the add…

MANISH K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 986/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

JASMIN K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 984/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

ALPESH K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1144/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

JITEN K. AJMERA (LEGAL HEIR OF LATE KISHORE H. AJMERA),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1143/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

MINAL M AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1112/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…{ "clean_text": "INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'D' BENCH MUMBAI\nBEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\n| ITA No. | AY | (Appellant) | Vs | (Respondent) |\n|----------------|---------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 626/Mum/2021 | 2012-13 | Jiten K Ajmera (Legal Heir of…

REENA A AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 1111/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

AVANI J AJMERA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 1110/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 1109/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. AY (Appellant) Vs (Respondent) 626/Mum/2021 2012-13 Jiten K Ajmera (Legal DCIT., Central Heir of Late Shri Kishore Circle – 2(2) H Ajmera) Room No.806, 4th Floor, Ajmera House, 8th Floor, Old Pathakwadi, CGO Building L.T. Marg Maharshi Karve Mumbai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400 002 Maharashtra- PAN NO: AGPPA2452B 400 020 1111/Mum/2020 2012-13 Reena A Ajmera Vs DCIT., Central 4th Floor, Ajmera House, Circle – 2(2) Pathakwadi, Room No.806, L.T. Marg 8th Floor, Old Mumbai CGO Build…

M/S MARS COIONIZER P LTD ,RAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL -II, RAIPUR

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

ITA 113/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Mars Colonizer Acit, Central-2, Private Limited, Bhopal C/O Hotel Amit Regency, बनाम/ Saibaba Complex, Vs. Moti Bag Chowk, Raipur (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Aafca 6847 B Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 04.04.2024

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ited, Raipur vs. ACIT, Central-2, Bhopal. ITA No. 113/Ind/2020 – AY 2013-14 (iii) Sanjeev Agarwal Vs. ITSC (2015) 56 Taxmann.com 214 (Allahabad HC) (iv) Rajhans Towers (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 56 Taxmann.com 67 (Delhi HC) (v) Bhagirath Aggarwal Vs. CIT (2013) 31 Taxmann.com 274 (Delhi) (vi) Bannalal Jat Constructions (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2019) 106 Taxmann.com 128 (SC) (vii) Roshan Lal Sanchiti Vs. PCIT (2023) 150 Taxmann.com 228 (SC) (viii) Thiru A.J. Ramesh Kumar Vs. DCIT (2022) 139 Taxmann.com 190 (Madras HC) (ix) CIT Vs. MAC Public Trust (2022) 144 Taxmann.com 54 (Madras HC) 13. In rejoinder, Ld. AR made follow…

Showing 1–20 of 144 · Page 1 of 8

...
Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT (31 Taxmann.com 274) — Cited in 144 Judgments | BharatTax