Chhat Mull Aggarwal v. CIT

116 ITR 694Reported decision1979#13260 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Chhat Mull Aggarwal v. CIT

Deep Multiplex Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 308/AHD/2020[206-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…t the time of assessment proceedings the assessee agreed that the lease income is coming under the purview of income from other sources. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Chhat Mull Aggarwal vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 694 (Puj. & Har.) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 146 taxman 335 (Guj.) thereby stating that the assessee should not be stopped from taking of plea which under the eyes of law is correct position. Merely on the ground that on the previous occasion the assessee has agreed the change of head…

Deep Multiplex Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 307/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…t the time of assessment proceedings the assessee agreed that the lease income is coming under the purview of income from other sources. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Chhat Mull Aggarwal vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 694 (Puj. & Har.) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 146 taxman 335 (Guj.) thereby stating that the assessee should not be stopped from taking of plea which under the eyes of law is correct position. Merely on the ground that on the previous occasion the assessee has agreed the change of head…

V.R.Venugopal, Mandya vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Mysore

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

ITA 1686/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. V. R. Venugopal, Acit, Vs. No.11 ‘Emerald Enclave’, Circle – 2(1), Belavadi Hobli, Srirangapatna, Mysuru. Mandya District – 571 606. Pan : Aaypv 2288 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Vageesh Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…s and KGs. Learned Counsel for the assessee also relied on the decision of the ITAT, Madras Bench in the case of R. T. Balasubramaniam Vs. ITO 50 ITD 513 (Madras) and the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Chhat Mull Aggarwal Vs. CIT 116 ITR 694 (P & H High Court). In the case of R. T. Balasubramaniam (supra), on identical facts where the First Appellate Authority refused to adjudicate on the issues before him on the ground that the authorized representative agreed for the addition relied on several decisions and came to the conclusion that if the admission of the Authorized Representati…

Kshitij Marine Services Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 360/SRT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.360/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S.Kshitij Marine Services Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, O-2, Office Floor, S Ward-1(1)(3), Surat. Madhulika Apartments, Bhatar Road, . Surat [Pan: Aaack 9924 E] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

…Kshitij Marine Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs.ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Surat/ITA No.360/SRT/2017 /A.Y.2012-13 Page 1 of 4 आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण,सुरत"यायपीठ,सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, Hon'ble JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, Hon'ble ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.360/SRT/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s.Kshitij Marine Services Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, O-2, Office Floor, s Ward-1(1)(3), Surat. Madhulika Apartments, Bhatar Road, . Surat [PAN: AAACK 9924 E] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Rasesh Shah – C…

Shri Chetankumar Vinodbhai Patel, Na

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2695/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2695/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Chetankumar Vinodbhai Patel, V. Income Tax Officer, 14, Bapunagar Society, Luncikui, Ward-1, Navsari. Navsari. [Pan: Amypp 9477 G] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 131

…ng words. Therefore, it was requested that the CIT(A) has not rightly interpreted his stand as unconditional agreement for addition. The ld. counsel further relied on the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Chhat Mull Aggarwal v. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 694 (Punjab & Haryana), wherein it was held that the ITO made addition of amount agreed to by assessee being his unexplained investment in house property-AAC however, deleted addition by accepting assessee’s explanation that he having actually spent said sum over and above initial investment, had agreed to addition of said sum, without understanding…

Smt. Jagjit Kaur Chawla, Mohali vs. DCIT, Mohali

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

ITA 189/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Sr.DR
Section 250(6)Section 36

…to come to the conclusion that the admission made by the assessee was not binding on him, he would be entitled to the relief in appeal. With great respect to the learned judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court who decided Chhat Mull Aggarwal's case [1979] 116 ITR 694, we are unable to agree. Where an assessee has made a statement of facts, he can have no grievance if the taxing authority taxes him in accordance with that statement. If he can have no grievance, he can file no appeal. Therefore, it is imperative, if the assessee's case is that his statement has been wrongly recorded or that he made it under mis…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Prajay Engineers Syndicate Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1644/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…elying on the order of Ld. CIT(A), relied on the following decisions: i. Decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Tejua Rohitkumar Kapadia, in Tax Appeal No. 691 of 2017, dt. 18-09-2017; ii. Chhat Mull Agarwal Vs. CIT (P&H HC) [116 ITR 694]; :- 9 -: iii. Gauri Sahay Ghisaram Vs. CIT [120 ITR 338] (All HC); iv. Ester Industries Ltd., Vs. CIT [316 ITR 260) (Del HC); v. CBDT Instructions No. 08/2011, dt. 11-08-2011; vi. Abdul Hameed Khan Vs. CIT [63 ITR 738) (AP-HC); 9. Considered the rival submissions and material on record. We notice that subsequent to survey operations, the genui…

Chhat Mull Aggarwal v. CIT (116 ITR 694) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax