CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT

30 ITD 161Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#4848 most cited

What is CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT authority for?

A statement recorded during a search cannot be the sole basis for an addition to income, especially if made in violation of CBDT instructions and the provisions of section 132(4).

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Indo Java & Co. v. IAC · 30 ITD 161 · section 132(4) · search assessment · statement during search · CBDT Instruction 47 · addition to income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132(4)Section 37(1)Section 133(6)Section 69ASection 234BSection 234D

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 65(b)section 181section 194qperquisite valuesection 100profit split methodsection 193section 65b(4)bright line testresale price methodsection 36(l)(va)

Judgments citing CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is found…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: - "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is foun…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is found…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: - "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is foun…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is found…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: - "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is foun…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: - "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is foun…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: - "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is foun…

JINDAL SAW LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 504/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…g case , similar issue of subsidy raised for the first time before the Tribunal, was admitted and duly adjudicated by the Tribunal: * Shree Bala ji Alloys vs. ITO 127 TTJ 129 (Asr. ITAT)-Confirmed by Supreme Court in 287 CTR 459 (SC) * Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC 30 ITD 161 (Del ITAT)(SB) * Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1539 of 2016 (Del. ITAT) * Tripti Manthol Inds vs. ITO in ITA No. 58 o f 2011 (Asr . ITAT) 11. The Government of India in its Foreign Trade Policy 2004 started Special Focus Initiatives with an object to continuously increase our percentage share of global trade and expanding e…

DCIT CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI vs. JINDAL SAW LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4760/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…g case , similar issue of subsidy raised for the first time before the Tribunal, was admitted and duly adjudicated by the Tribunal: * Shree Bala ji Alloys vs. ITO 127 TTJ 129 (Asr. ITAT)-Confirmed by Supreme Court in 287 CTR 459 (SC) * Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC 30 ITD 161 (Del ITAT)(SB) * Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1539 of 2016 (Del. ITAT) * Tripti Manthol Inds vs. ITO in ITA No. 58 o f 2011 (Asr . ITAT) 11. The Government of India in its Foreign Trade Policy 2004 started Special Focus Initiatives with an object to continuously increase our percentage share of global trade and expanding e…

JINDAL SAW LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4693/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…g case , similar issue of subsidy raised for the first time before the Tribunal, was admitted and duly adjudicated by the Tribunal: * Shree Bala ji Alloys vs. ITO 127 TTJ 129 (Asr. ITAT)-Confirmed by Supreme Court in 287 CTR 459 (SC) * Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC 30 ITD 161 (Del ITAT)(SB) * Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1539 of 2016 (Del. ITAT) * Tripti Manthol Inds vs. ITO in ITA No. 58 o f 2011 (Asr . ITAT) 11. The Government of India in its Foreign Trade Policy 2004 started Special Focus Initiatives with an object to continuously increase our percentage share of global trade and expanding e…

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)

…Singh V. Janki Singh: AIR 1967 SC 341 (SC) Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai V. CIT: 88 ITR 293 (P&H) Indo Java & Co. V. IAC: 30 ITD 161(SB) Addition cannot be made simply on the basis of statement recorded during search, that too, in violation of CBDT Instruction 47. Reference in this regard may be made to provisions of section 132(4) of the Act, which reads as under: "(4): The authorized officer may, during the course of the search or seizure. examine on oath any person who is fo…

DISCOVER URJAA CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 5538/MUM/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri B R Baskaran: A.Y. : -

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 80G

…unal also relied upon the order in Jamsetji Tata Trust vs. Joint Director of Income- tax (Exemption) Range- II, (2014) 44 taxmann.com 447 (Mum.-Trib.), which in turn places reliance on para 6 of order of Chennai Bench of Tribunal in Bharata Kalanjali vs. ITO, 30 ITD 161 (Mad.) which reads as under :- “6. The crucial question is only whether the conditions in section 11 are complied with. That section states that the income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable purposes shall not be included in the total income to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India. The que…

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS WARD 1 4, MUMBAI vs. J N TATA ENDOWMENT FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION OF INDIANS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 3573/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Smt. Renu Jauhriito(Exemptions) Ward -14, Jn Tata Endowment Vs. Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, For The Higher Mtnl Telephone Exchange Education Of Indians, Buillding, Peddar Road, 2Nd Floor, Bombay Mumbai -400026. House, 24 Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan/Gir No. Aaatc0085C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(c)Section 260A

…purposes are confined to the taxable territories or not. It is sufficient if the income is applied within India and to that extent the income will be exempt under the said provision. The appellant relied on the judgments in the case of Bharata Kalanji vs. ITO 30 ITD 161 (Mad.) and H.E.H. The Nizam's Pilgrimage money trust vs. CIT 171 ITR 323 affirmed in 243 ITR 676. The AO did not accept the submission of the 7 JN Tata Endowment for the Higher Education of Indians, Mumbai appellant and disallowed the exemption of Rs. 4,04,35,275/- by concluding as under: 1. Application as well as charitable purpose should be i…

M/S. RELIGARE ENTERPRISE LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5116/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 37

…n 14A of the Act [refer NTPC: 229 ITR 383 (SC), CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del.), SAIL DSP VR Employees Association 1998 V. UOI : 262 ITR 638 (Cal.), Pt. Sheo Nath Prasad Sharma vs. CIT: 66 ITR 647 (All), Indo Java & Co. vs. ITO: 30 ITD 161 (Del SB)]. It is pertinent to mention here that similar grounds were raised and allowed in the case of appellant/ applicant itself for preceding assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No.1549/Del/2014. In the light of the aforesaid, the additional and/or modified grounds of appeal are being raised. The aforesaid additional and/or modified grounds, it is…

NARAYAN INDUSTIRES ,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-19, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6878/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 234CSection 37Section 75Section 80Section 80I

…y the Tribunal and it was held that the incentive received be treated as capital receipt. Reliance is placed on following judgments:  Shree Balaji Alloys Vs. ITO 127 TTJ 129 (Asr. ITAT) Confirmed by Supreme Court in 287 CTR 459 (SC)  Indo Java & Co Vs. IAC 30 ITD 161 (Del ITAT (SB)  Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1539 of 2016 (Del ITAT)  Tripti Manthollands Vs. ITO in ITA No. 58 of 2011 (Asr. ITAT) Deduction u/s 80IC-Duty drawback: 4. During the year under consideration, the appellant received duty drawback amounting to Rs.1,92,64,540/- which is 3 Narayan Industries in the nature of r…

NARAYAN INDUSTIRES ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 60(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6153/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 253

…g case, similar issue of subsidy raised for the first time before the Tribunal, was admitted and duly adjudicated by the Tribunal:  Shree Balaji Alloys vs. ITO 127 TTJ 129 (Asr. ITAT)- Confirmed by Supreme Court in 287 CTR 459 (SC)  Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC 30 ITD 161 (Del ITAT)(SB)  Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1539 of 2016 (Del. ITAT)  Tripti Manthol Inds vs. ITO in ITA No. 58 of 2011 (Asr. ITAT) 11. The Government of India in its Foreign Trade Policy 2004 started Special Focus Initiatives with an object to continuously increase our percentage share of global trade and expanding em…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys vs. ITO: 127 T'TJ 129 (Asr ITAT) - Confirmed b…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys vs. ITO: 127 T'TJ 129 (Asr ITAT) - Confirmed b…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys vs. ITO: 127 T'TJ 129 (Asr ITAT) - Confirmed b…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT V. Sreeni Printers: 67 STC 279 (Ker.) KrishanLal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT (30 ITD 161) — Cited in 24 Judgments | BharatTax