CIT v. A.R. Enterprises

350 ITR 489Supreme Court of India2013#12712 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. A.R. Enterprises

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 921/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 153C

…nt proceedings. In fact, in the absence of the returns filed, as indeed accounts, the entire material found during the seach is liable to be regarded as incriminating. Reference here, with profit, may be drawn to the decision in CIT v. A.R. Enterprises [2013] 350 ITR 489 (SC). In appeals arising out of assessments u/s.158BC and 158BD of the Act, the Apex court explained two scenarios contemplated by the Act for income being undisclosed, as: (a) where the income has clearly not been disclosed, and 11 ITA Nos.920-921/Coch/2022 (AYs. 2008-09 & 2009-10) Santhimadom Herbal City Trust v. Asst. CIT (b) where the income…

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 920/COCH/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 153C

…nt proceedings. In fact, in the absence of the returns filed, as indeed accounts, the entire material found during the seach is liable to be regarded as incriminating. Reference here, with profit, may be drawn to the decision in CIT v. A.R. Enterprises [2013] 350 ITR 489 (SC). In appeals arising out of assessments u/s.158BC and 158BD of the Act, the Apex court explained two scenarios contemplated by the Act for income being undisclosed, as: (a) where the income has clearly not been disclosed, and 11 ITA Nos.920-921/Coch/2022 (AYs. 2008-09 & 2009-10) Santhimadom Herbal City Trust v. Asst. CIT (b) where the income…

LEKSHMI TRADERS vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/2/2018HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: LEKSHMI TRADERSFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 132Section 158B

…additional ground raised by the appellant, while passing Annexure J Order, without considering the ratio of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Manish Maheswari's Case, reported in (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC), A.R Enterprises' Case, reported in (2013) 350 ITR 489 (SC), Calcutta Knitwears Case, reported in (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC)? ii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that recording of satisfaction by the assessing officer is not contemplated u/s. 158BD, which forms the basis for passing Annexure J order? iii. Whether on the facts an…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.S.AGGARWAL

ITA - 169 / 2005HC Delhi23 Apr 2018
Section 132Section 158Section 260

…y pre-eminent expression used in the said clause is ―has not been or would not have been disclosed‖ for the purposes of this Act. We shall be subsequently referring to, in detail, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Asst. CIT v. A.R. Enterprises, [2013] 350 ITR 489 (SC); (2013) 3 SCC 196, but suffice at this stage, it is to notice and reproduce the following paragraph from A.R. Enterprises (supra) (page 500 of 350 ITR): ―The genesis of the issue before us lies within the folds of this section. Sections 158BD and 158BC, along with the rest of Chapter XIV-B, find application only in the event of disc…

ASST CIT CEN CIR 18 & 19, MUMBAI vs. J.S.W. ISPAT STEEL LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 5616/MUM/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Ms. Savita BundasFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Joshi
Section 132Section 143(3)

…e assessee’s total income at Rs.91.00 crores based on advance tax payment of Rs.29.90 crores is in order and is to be upheld. In this regard reliance was placed on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. A.R. Enterprises reported in (2013) 350 ITR 489(SC), wherein it has been held that it would be difficult to accept the plea that the payment of advance tax is tantamount to the disclosure of income or that it indicates the intention of the assessee to disclose commensurate income in the return of income. 5.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. According t…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. HM EXPORTS

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/191/2009HC Karnataka04 Aug 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 132Section 158BSection 260Section 80H

…sent case, the return filed by the assessee on 20.08.1998 was not under either of the provisions. In support of his submission, he relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax –vs- A.R. Enterprises (2013) 350 ITR 489. 12. We have gone through the said judgment which relates to the claim of having made disclosure on the basis that advance tax had been duly deposited after deducting TDS. On such basis, the assessee therein was claiming that there was disclosure of income made by it and that in such circumstances, it would no…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS MANISHA A SADHWANI

ITA/414/2007HC Karnataka25 Nov 2013

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 158BSection 260

…d and determined as the result of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act.” Following the aforesaid judgment, the Apex Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax –vs- A.R.Enterprises reported in (2013) 350 ITR 489 (SC) has held as under: “11. Sections 132 and 132-A of the Act incorporate provision of search, seizure and requisition which were resorted to for the conduct of search at the premises of M/s.A.R.Mercantile Pvt.Ltd. For the evaluation of the material seized during the - - - 8 - operation or proceedings under Section 132 or 132A of…

COMM.OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE vs. NAVABHARAT ENTERPRISES HYD

In the result, Income Tax Appeal No

ITTA/3/2000HC Telangana02 Jan 2012

Bench: This Court & Hence Both Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Common Judgment. 2. Sri Ravi Kant, Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Rahul Agarwal, Advocate Have Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Sri Manish Goel, Advocate Has Put In Appearance On Behalf Of Revenue. 3. Revenue'S Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law:- (1)Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Tribunal Was Right In Holding That Authorization For Search

For Appellant: - M/S Verma Roadways Through its Partner R.K.VermaFor Respondent: - Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Section 132Section 158Section 260A

…1 (AFR) Reserved on 17.11.2017 Delivered on 11.01.2018 Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 3 of 2000 Appellant :- M/S Verma Roadways Through its Partner R.K.Verma Respondent :- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Counsel for Appellant :- A.P. Singh, S.P. Gupta, Counsel for Respondent :- Ashish Agarwal, Manish Goel And Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 4 of 2000 Appellant :- The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kanpur & Another Respondent :- M/S Verma Roadways .133/225 Transport Nagar,Kanpur Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Agrawal,C.S.C., Manish Goel Counsel for Respondent :- Ravi Kant, Seni…

CIT v. A.R. Enterprises (350 ITR 489) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax