Calcutta (xvii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd.

332 ITR 468High Court#5265 most cited
22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 292CSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 115BBESection 132Section 69Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 38section 153a(1)(b)section 91section 292csection 65bsection 65section 131(1a)survey under section 133abeneficial ownerpanchnamasection 132(4a)section 292

Judgments citing Calcutta (xvii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd.

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle, Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 335/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…as made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the said proposition and reject arbitrary assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case…

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 334/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…as made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the said proposition and reject arbitrary assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case…

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, DCIT Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 333/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…as made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the said proposition and reject arbitrary assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case…

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle, Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 330/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…as made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the said proposition and reject arbitrary assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case…

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 329/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…as made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the said proposition and reject arbitrary assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case…

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rama Shankar Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1005/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…191 (Del) CIT v. Anil Bhalla (extracted at page 309 of Paper Book) viii) 423 ITR 1 (Del) CIT v. Sant Lal (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) ix) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT v. Mis. Lata mangeshkar x) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) Pr. CIT v. Umesh Ishrani xi) 332 ITR 468 (P&H) CIT v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xii) 223 Taxman 44 (All) CIT v. Devendra Kumar Singhal xiii) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) CIT v. Maulik Kumar K. Shah (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xiv) 86 ITD 13 (Del) Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) v. ACIT (extracted at pages 310-311 of Paper Book) xv) 187 ITD 289 (Asr) Smt. H…

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rajesh Rani Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1004/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…191 (Del) CIT v. Anil Bhalla (extracted at page 309 of Paper Book) viii) 423 ITR 1 (Del) CIT v. Sant Lal (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) ix) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT v. Mis. Lata mangeshkar x) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) Pr. CIT v. Umesh Ishrani xi) 332 ITR 468 (P&H) CIT v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xii) 223 Taxman 44 (All) CIT v. Devendra Kumar Singhal xiii) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) CIT v. Maulik Kumar K. Shah (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xiv) 86 ITD 13 (Del) Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) v. ACIT (extracted at pages 310-311 of Paper Book) xv) 187 ITD 289 (Asr) Smt. H…

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Income Tax Department vs. Payal Khemka, K

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…191 (Del) CIT v. Anil Bhalla (extracted at page 309 of Paper Book) viii) 423 ITR 1 (Del) CIT v. Sant Lal (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) ix) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT v. Mis. Lata mangeshkar x) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) Pr. CIT v. Umesh Ishrani xi) 332 ITR 468 (P&H) CIT v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xii) 223 Taxman 44 (All) CIT v. Devendra Kumar Singhal xiii) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) CIT v. Maulik Kumar K. Shah (extracted at page 310 of Paper Book) xiv) 86 ITD 13 (Del) Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) v. ACIT (extracted at pages 310-311 of Paper Book) xv) 187 ITD 289 (Asr) Smt. H…

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

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

ITA 2363/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 153DSection 69BSection 69C

…S.M. Aggarwal iii) 296 ITR 619 (Del) CIT v. GirishChaudhary iv) 305 ITR 245 (Del) CIT vs. VedParkashChaudhary v) 308 ITR 230 (Del) CIT vs. D.K. Gupta vi) 383 ITR 320 (Del) CIT v. VatikaLandbase (P) Ltd. vii) 393 ITR 276 (Bom) CIT v. Arpit Land (P) Ltd. viii) 332 ITR 468 (P&H) CIT v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. ix) 212 Taxman 1 (Del) CIT v. Jai Pal Aggarwal x) 187 ITD 289 (Asr) Smt. HarmohinderKaur v. DCIT xi) 165 TTJ 145 (Del) ACIT v. SharadChaudhary II That statements recorded/material relied and gathered behind the back of the assessee and without any opportunity for cross examination despite specific request made du…

Birendra Kumar Sharma, Gwalior vs. ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/IND/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Dharmendra Kumar Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 710/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 709/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Ramesh Chandra Parashar, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 708/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Dabra vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 707/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Lalta Prasad Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 706/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Santosh Kumar Sharma, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Kamlesh Kumar Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 704/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Khemraj Singh Chauhan, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 703/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Sukhdev Singh Dhariwal, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 702/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Shri Sanjay Kumar Sahu, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…er strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose slips represented payment of wages is not possible 18 (2003) 84 ITD 320 The presumption under the Para 7 129- (Mum) Straptex provision of section 132 (4A) 135 (India) P. Ltd. v. would in any case…

Calcutta (xvii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. (332 ITR 468) — Cited in 22 Judgments | BharatTax