Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7

Q: How many judgments cite Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7 (77 ITR 6), spanning 2012 to 2024.

77 ITR 6Supreme Court of India1970#4234 most cited

What is Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7 authority for?

A revision order under Section 263 is invalid if it is influenced by revenue audit objections and lacks independent application of mind by the Principal Commissioner. The Commissioner must apply their own unbiased and independent mind to arrive at a definite conclusion.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v CIT · 77 ITR 6 (SC) · revision u/s 263 · lack of enquiry · inadequate enquiry · non application of mind · unbiased mind · revenue audit objections · section 263(1)

Also reported as

8 AIR 1970

Issues it is cited on

section 44af section 262 trade creditors inadequate enquiry section 263(1)lack of enquiry revision u/s 263 non application of mind malabar industrial section 194a sundry creditors section 44a

Judgments citing Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S PRAG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objection of assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 660/LKW/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Videshri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 40A(2)

…led to exchange opinions or give advice in regard to judicial proceedings. In our opinion, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioners under section 124 of the Evidence Act." (527) 2. Sirpur paper Mill Ltd. Vs. CWT reported in (1970) 77 ITR 6 (SC). "The power conferred by section 25 is not administrative: it is quasi judicial. The expression "may make such inquiry and pass such order thereon" does not confer any absolute discretion on the Commissioner. In exercise of the power the Commissioner must bring to bear an unbiased mind, consider impartially the objections raised by the aggriev…

SHRI BHANVARLAL CHAMPALAL KANUGA,UNJHA vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 95/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.95/Ahd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Bhanvarlal Champalal The Principal Cit बनाम/ Kanuga Range-3 C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate Pratyakash Kar Bhavan V/S. 512, Times Square – I Ahmedabad Opp. Ram Baug Bungalows Nr. Ravija Plaza Thaltej-Shilaj Road Ahmedabad – 380 059. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acmpk 0172 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan H. Shah, Ar & Shri Aman Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pushpendra Singh Chaudhary, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 29/03/2022 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit(A)” In Short] In Exercise Of The Shri Bhanvarlal Champalal Kanuga Vs. Pr.Cit-3 Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ketan H. Shah, AR &For Respondent: Shri Pushpendra Singh

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…cision of Jaipur tribunal in case of Modern Minerals Vs. ACIT [1997] 59 TTJ 733 (Jaipur) where the ratio of Apex Court’s judgement in case of Indian & Eastern News paper Society Vs CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996 was followed. 2. Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. Vs CIT [1970] 77 ITR 6 (SC). Shri Bhanvarlal Champalal Kanuga vs. Pr.CIT-3 Asst. Year : 2017-18 6 3. Guj. High Court decision in SCA No. 11900/2016 in the case of Binori Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. 4. Guj. High Court decision in SCA No. 7140/2014 in the case of Raj Ratna Metal Industries Ltd. 5. Delhi High Court Decision in Sun Pharmaceuticals, [2016] 137 DTR 18. 6. Jammu and Ka…

EXOTIC REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263

…the Assessing Officer are therefore not those of a reasonable and prudent officer, particularly in the matter of inquiries or verifications as well as in stating his analysis and findings. The decisions of the Apex Court in Sirpus Raper Mill Limited Vs. CWT (77 ITR 6) (SC) and CIT, Shimla Vs. Green World Corporation (2009) 314 ITR 81 (SC) hold that it is the absolute discretion of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to revise an order passed by the Assessing Officer. The only condition is that he/she needs to apply his/her own mind and arrive at a definite conclusion, which is what has been done here. In…

SRISHTI ASSOCIATES,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA-RAJASTHAN

ITA 587/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 246ASection 44A

…erence made by some other authority and on this issue the reliance was placed on the decision of (i) C.D. Singh V ITO 77 TTJ (All) 282 and (ii) Kirti Lal Kalidas & Co. Vs DCTT 67 ITD 573, in which reliance has been placed on 48 ITR 34 (SC) 70 ITR 772 (AP) and 77 ITR 6 (SC). It was also argued that document found from the possession of Shri Upendra Soni cannot be considered as found from the possession of Appellant and thus cannot be considered as evidence in the hands of the Appellant. It is trite law that the presumption of section 132(4A) and section 292C of the Act is applicable in the case of person from whos…

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 148/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

…f is based on the averment that the AO has failed to consider the relevant seized material. In this regard, in “Jeewanlal Ltd. V Addl. CIT, 108 ITR 407 (Cal), following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. Vs CWT, 77 ITR 6 (S.C), it has been held that while exercising revisionary powers, the Commissioner must have an unbiased mind and he must decide the dispute in accordance with the procedure which is consistent with the principle of natural justice and that he cannot permit his mind to be influenced by the dictation of another authority; and that he cannot permit…

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 147/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 146/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

SHREE MADHI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,BARDOLI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 233/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shree Madhi Vibhag Khand Udyog Pr.C.I.T.-1 Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Room No. 123, 1St Floor, Vs. P.O. Box No. 5, At & Post- Madhi, Aayakar Bhavan, Tal: Bardoli, Surat-394340. Majuragate, Surat. Pan: Aaaas 4732 J Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

…being influenced by the revenue audit objections and without application of unbiased and independent mind by the Pr.CIT, being patently in contravention to the provisions of law and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sirpur Paper Mill Ltd. Vs. CWT (1970) 77 ITR 6 (SC) is without jurisdiction, bad in law and hence, liable to be struck down. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the learned Pr. CIT has grievously failed to appreciate in the right, lawful and proper perspectives, the explanations substantiated with the cogent, credible and authentic evidences, documents, accounts,…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

C.A. No.-021762-021762 - 2017Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 21762 OF 2017 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) APPELLANT(S) VERSUS AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A. No. 8193/2012; C.A. No. 5057/2012; C.A. No. 5058/2014; C.A. No. 9974/2018; C.A. No. 5056/2012; C.A. No. 4196/2015; C.A. No. 4374/2015; C.A. No. 9380/2017; C.A. No. 13071/2017; C.A. No. 12058/2017; C.A. No. 16375/2017; C.A. No. 12869/2017; C.A. No. 17527/2017; C.A. No. 21845/2017; C.A. No. 5719/2018; C.A. No. 988…

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

…ioner of Bihar and Others8, State of U.P. v. Maharaja Dharmander Prasad Singh9, State of NCT & Anr. v Sanjeev Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7 (1970) 1 SCC 795 : (1970) 77 ITR 6 8 AIR 1970 SC 1896 9 (1989) 2 SCC 505 10 AIR 2005 SC 2080 11 137 ITR 605 (Del) 12 ITO 176 ITR 352 17 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters CIT13, CIT v T.R. Rajkumari14, Rajputana Mining Agencies v ITO15, and Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v ACIT16. 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.…

SHRI HIRALAL D. THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), , AHMEDABAD

ITA 1073/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Conducted Through Virtual Court) ] ] BEFORE S/SHRI PRAMOD M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT AND T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1072 & 1073/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year :2008-09 & 2009-10 AND Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Hiralal D. Thakkar Pr.CIT (Central) Satkar Guest House Vs Ahmedabad. Swaminarayan Kutir S.G. Highway, Opp: YMCA Club Nr.Nirma Firm Ahmedabad अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Divyang Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date o…

SHRI HIRALAL D. THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), , AHMEDABAD

ITA 1072/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)

M/S MUSTAFA ASSOCIATES,,CHANDRAPUR vs. C.I.T.-3, NAGPUR

The appeal of the appellant is allowed in term of aforestated observation

ITA 167/NAG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 167/Nag/2015 आयकर िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 M/S Mustafa Associates, Nr Vasant Bhavan, Kasturba Rd. Chandrapur – 442 402(Maharashtra) Pan : Aalfm 6727 F . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur – 440 001 (Mh) . . . . . . . ""यथ" / Respondent }Kjk / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. C. Thakar Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 18/02/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull, Am; The Appellant Against The Revisionary Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Nagpur [For Short “Cit”] Dt. 07/03/2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Dove Out Of Regular Order Of Assessment Dt. 27/11/2012 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer-Ward-2, Chandrapur [For Shot “Ao”], Filed These Appeals Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [For Short “The Tribunal”] U/S 253. Itat-Nagpur Page 1 Of 16

For Appellant: Shri S. C. ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय "यायािधकरण, नागपुर "यायपीठ, नागपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (Through Virtual Court at Raipur) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 167/NAG/2015 आयकर िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 M/s Mustafa Associates, Nr Vasant Bhavan, Kasturba Rd. Chandrapur – 442 402(Maharashtra) PAN : AALFM 6727 F . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur – 440 001 (Mh) . . . . . . . ""यथ" / Respondent }kjk / Appearances Assessee by : Shri S. C. Thaka…

M/S. PRACHI AGRICULTURE & PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, RAIPUR

ITA 30/RPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 30/Rpr/2021 कर धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 M/S Prachi Agriculture & Properties Private Limited 18-19, Anupam Nagar, Raipur (Cg) 492 001 Pan : Aabcp 3701 H . . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Nikhilesh Begani Revenue By : Shri P. K. Mishra सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 10/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull, Am; Against The Revisionary Order Of Principal Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 [For Short “Pcit”] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Vide Order Dt 26/03/2021, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2016-2017, The Appellant Assessee Filed This Appeal Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [For Short “The Tribunal”] U/S 253(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh BeganiFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 68

…d Vs CIT” reported at 290 ITR 395, where Hon’ble Lordship have emphasised the ratio decidendi laid by Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sirpur ITAT-Raipur Page 10 of 12 M/s Prachi Agriculture & Properties Private Limited AY 2016-2017 Paper Mill Ltd. Vs CWT” reported in 77 ITR 6, that while exercising power, the Commissioner must have an unbiased mind and decide the dispute according to the procedure which is consistent with the principles of natural justice and cannot permit his mind to be influenced by the dictation of another authority. The relevant observations from page 7 of the order read as under; “In exercise of the…

ARIHANT JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,BHILAI vs. PR. CIT-1, RAIPUR

ITA 61/RPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 61/Rpr/2021 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Arihant Jewellers Private Limited 2/6, Akash Ganga, Supela, Bhilai (C.G.) .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaica 6953 H

For Appellant: Shri S. R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263Section 263(1)Section 68

…Guwahati High Court while adjudicating on similar issue in “B & A Plantation & Industries Ltd Vs CIT” reported at 290 ITR 395, where Hon’ble Lordship have emphasised the ratio decidendi laid by Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sirpur Paper Mill Ltd. Vs CWT” reported in 77 ITR 6, that while exercising power, the Commissioner must have an unbiased mind and decide ITAT-Raipur Page 9 of 11 AY – 2011-2012 the dispute according to the procedure which is consistent with the principles of natural justice and cannot permit his mind to be influenced by the dictation of another authority. The relevant observations from page 7 of the…

NEELACHAL I.NIGAM L. vs. ASST.COMNR.OF I.TAX

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

MR. ABHISAR SHARMA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3285/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Vs Dcit, B-602, Plot No.F-2, Circle-64(1), The Crescent, B-Block, Room No.314, Sector-50, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Noida. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aigps3840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th March, 2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Pcit-22, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 22Nd July, 2005 Declaring Income Of Rs.9,00,355/-. The Assessee In The Return Of Income Had Declared Income From Salary At Rs.9,81,964/- & Loss From House Property At Rs.81,609/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 4Th July, 2006 At The Same Income. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 27Th March, 2012 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Addl. Cit, Range-7, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No.526 Dated 27Th March, 2012. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 28Th March, 2013, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.11,03,270/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.9,00,355/- Wherein He Made The Following Additions:-

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 17(2)Section 263Section 68Section 69C

…unsel for assessee submitted that section 263 does not permit revision of order on the basis of suspicion, conjectures and surmises. For the above proposition, he relied on the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. vs. CWT, 77 ITR 6 and 22 Jeewanlal Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 108 ITR 407 (Cal). Relying on various other decisions, the ld. Counsel submitted that section 263 of the Act cannot be invoked to make deeper enquiry. The ld. Counsel also relied on various other decisions placed in the synopsis and submitted that proceedings u/s 263 cannot be initiated for inadequate enquiry, but…

JITINDER SINGH CHADHA,NEW DELHI vs. PRCIT-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2732/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiita No. 2732/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Mr. Jitindar Singh Chadha, Vs Pr. Cit-18, C-266, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpc6181D Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Ahuja, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kumar Hrishikesh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.03.2018 Of Ld. Pr. Cit-18, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Ahuja, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Kumar Hrishikesh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Judicial Member ITA No. 2732/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Mr. Jitindar Singh Chadha, Vs Pr. CIT-18, C-266, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110024 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABPC6181D Assessee by : Sh. R. S. Ahuja, CA Revenue by : Sh. Kumar Hrishikesh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 04.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2018 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, Vice President: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 31.03.2018 of ld. Pr. CIT-18, New De…

KUMAR PAPPU SINGH,TANUKU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 270/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.270/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-2014) Sri Kumar Pappu Singh Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.23-3-26, Sundaram Nagar Income Tax, Sajjapuram Circle-1, Kks Towers, Tanuku Rr Pet, Eluru [Pan : Aeepp2496P] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…he assessment, or the authority empowered to rectify a turnover, which had escaped assessment, has acted without jurisdiction, revisional jurisdiction could have been exercised. Emphasised the Supreme Court, in the case of Sirpur Paper Mill Ltd. v. CWT [1970] 77 ITR 6, that while exercising power, the CIT must have an unbiased mind and decide the dispute according to the procedure which is consistent with the principles of natural justice and cannot permit his mind to be influenced by the dictation 23 I.T.A. No.270 /Viz/2018 Sri Kumar Pappu Singh, Tanuku of another authority. The relevant observations made by a…

MR. PRANJAL PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-2,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1357/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.H. Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT-D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2012-13 Mr. Pranjal Patel, The Pr. CIT, 5, Navavas, Ahmedabad Sabarmati, Ahmedabad Vs (Respondent) PAN: AQAPP5238P (Appellant) Revenue by: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT-D.R. Assessee by: Shri S.H. Talati, A.R. Date of hearing : 28-09-2018 Date of pronouncement : 07-12-2018 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, arises from order of the CIT-2, Ahmedabad dated 28-03-2017, in proceedings under secti…

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2