What is CIT v. Anandha Metals Corporation authority for?

Additions based on stock discrepancies are invalid without independent verification, and reassessments cannot be made on presumptive discrepancies. Valuations of stock accepted by Sales Tax Authorities are binding on income tax authorities.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Anandha Metals Corporation?

30 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Anandha Metals Corporation (273 ITR 262), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Anandha Metals Corporation come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(2), Section 145(3), Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 69A, Section 115BBE.

CIT v. Anandha Metals Corporation (273 ITR 262)

LAL CHAND CHOUDHARY,JAISALMER vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE, BARMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 840/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelal Chand Choudhary Acit/ Dcit, Circle, S-8, Transport Nagar, Barmer Jaisalmer - 345001 Pan No. Aaopc 6671 K Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Revenue By Shri Lalit Kumar Bishnoi, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 09.04.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

…) ITR 484 (Mad)), wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has to adopt the figures and turnover finally assessed by the sales tax authorities. 28. Similar issue was also considered in the case of CIT - Vs - Anandha Metal Corporation (2005 273 ITR 262 (Mad)), and judgment delivered in favour of the assessee. Again, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT V/s Shri Shaik Usman Ali on 14 February, 2022, T.C.A. Nos 103 & 104 of 2014 held as under:- "The learned counsel for the Assessee has brought to the notice of this Court the decision rendered by this Court in T.C.A.No. 1526 of 2007,…

LAKHPAT TRADING AND INDUSTRYS PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 600/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelakhpat Trading & Acit, Circle-3 Industryspvt. Ltd. Jodhpur G-72/73 79/80, 1St Phase, Boranada, Jodhpur - 342001 Pan No. Aaccl 5668 C Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Smt. Runi Pal, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18 Challenging Therein The Rejection Of Its Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3), Estimation Of Income & Reducing Genuine Sales.

Section 115BSection 145(3)Section 68Section 69C

…es are subject to VAT and the VAT authority after due consideration of the documents provided by third party ex-factory delivery had been accepted such sale as genuine. The Hon'ble Madres High Court in the case of CIT V/s Anandha Metal Corporation reported in 273 ITR 262 has observed on similar facts that no adverse view in this regard can be taken by the Id AO. 23. On perusal of case records, it is evident that voluminous details were submitted by the assessee as and when called for by the AO and the assessee had also produced the books of account and bills during the assessment 25 Asst. Year: 2017-18 proceedi…

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…any suppression of sales in the case of assessee and as noted above, no material was found during the course of search of any sales made by the assessee outside the books of account. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metal Corporation, 273 ITR 262 held that when the valuation of stock accepted by the Sales Tax Authorities is binding on the incometax Authorities. We may also note here that though ld. CIT(A) has invoked his powers u/s. 251 of the IT Act for the purpose of rejection of books of account u/s. 145(3), which have not been rejected by the AO, but there is no observation in the app…

M/S KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 379/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…any suppression of sales in the case of assessee and as noted above, no material was found during the course of search of any sales made by the assessee outside the books of account. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metal Corporation, 273 ITR 262 held that when the valuation of stock accepted by the Sales Tax Authorities is binding on the incometax Authorities. We may also note here that though ld. CIT(A) has invoked his powers u/s. 251 of the IT Act for the purpose of rejection of books of account u/s. 145(3), which have not been rejected by the AO, but there is no observation in the app…

AMIT KUMAR SEN,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 23(1), , HOOGHLY

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

ITA 388/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.388/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Amit Kumar Sen, Vs Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly Sahapur, Tarakeswar, Hooghly (Wb)-712410 Pan No. :Aavfs 6967 R (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ars रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Addl/Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.12.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1071619653(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ld. Ars Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Was Specifically Asked To Point Out How The Assessee Has Responded To The Chart Issued By The Assessing Officer, Which Is Recorded In Page 3 Of The Assessment Order. Other Than Referring To Various Replies That Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Which Were Uploaded From The Portal, No Specific Reply To The Said Para Was Pointed Out. Admittedly, The Assessee Has Not Been Able To Dislodge The Said Chart.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra and Shri Trideep Nayak, ArsFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Addl/CIT-Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…sed based on estimated additions or assumptions. Since the additions here are based on presumptive discrepancies, the penalty initiation is unjustified. 11. Stock Discrepancy Requires Independent Verification: Case Law: CIT v. Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad): The court held that discrepancies in stock must be verified independently, and arbitrary additions based on stock differences are invalid without proper verification. The Ld. Assessing Officer's failure to reconcile stock differences with independent data weakens the assessment order. 12. CIT vs. Bilahari Investments (P) Ltd. (2018) 404 IT…

RAKESH VYAS,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 295/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 295/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Rakesh Vyas Income Tax Officer, Vs. 10/113, Swarn Path, Jaipur Mansarovar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACAPV 6104 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 656/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani (FCA)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148A

…that the sales deserve to be accepted as genuine. 40 ITA No. 656/JP/2023 & CO No. 06/JP/2023 ITO vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni The case of the asseseee is supported by the decision of the Hon,ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs Anand Metal Corporation 2005 273 ITR 262. In view of these facts it is submitted that sales are part of the regular Books of Account of the asseessee regularly maintained in the normal course of business, cash sales are duly accounted for on day today basis in the cash book and these are against the regular stock available in the stock register . There was no evidence with the learned A…

ARULJOTHI EXPORTS PVT LTD ,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT , CIRCLE - 2 , TIRUPUR

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1089/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2022 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Aruljothi Exports Private Limited Acit, बनाम 70C, Karupparayan Koil Street, Circle-2, Main Road, Samalapuram, Tirupur. / Vs. Tirupur-641 663. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadca-7439-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S.Sridhar (Advocate-Erode)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D.Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26-07-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar (Advocate-Erode)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…er perspective. 2 3. The finding of the 1eamed CIT(A) in para-6.4, page- 12 of the order , that NORMALLY THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCEPTED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX AUTHORITY is highly perverse, for the decisions of the Madras High Court reported in 273 ITR 262 and 352 lTR 484 were not considered at all, leave alone considering the same in proper perspective. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the addition was made by the Assessing officer without rejecting the books of accounts and without pointing out any defects in the books of accounts. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred, in not c…

KAMIVISA PRODUCTS,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT, PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 995/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.881 To 884 & 995/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 & 2012-13)

Section 139(1)Section 80I

…-tax department to adopt different rate only on the basis of third party suppliers rate charged on the products. In this regard, the learned AR relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad) and in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Sakuntala Devi Khetan (2013) 352 ITR 484 (Mad). 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that there is clear difference between rate charged by Kamivisa Products, Puducherry unit and third party supplier M/s. Aeroaroma Home Care Products for very same product…

M/S KAMIVISA PRODUCTS,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT , PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 884/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.881 To 884 & 995/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 & 2012-13)

Section 139(1)Section 80I

…-tax department to adopt different rate only on the basis of third party suppliers rate charged on the products. In this regard, the learned AR relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad) and in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Sakuntala Devi Khetan (2013) 352 ITR 484 (Mad). 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that there is clear difference between rate charged by Kamivisa Products, Puducherry unit and third party supplier M/s. Aeroaroma Home Care Products for very same product…

M/S KAMIVISA PRODUCTS,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT , PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 883/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.881 To 884 & 995/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 & 2012-13)

Section 139(1)Section 80I

…-tax department to adopt different rate only on the basis of third party suppliers rate charged on the products. In this regard, the learned AR relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad) and in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Sakuntala Devi Khetan (2013) 352 ITR 484 (Mad). 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that there is clear difference between rate charged by Kamivisa Products, Puducherry unit and third party supplier M/s. Aeroaroma Home Care Products for very same product…

M/S KAMIVISA PRODUCTS,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT , PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 882/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.881 To 884 & 995/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 & 2012-13)

Section 139(1)Section 80I

…-tax department to adopt different rate only on the basis of third party suppliers rate charged on the products. In this regard, the learned AR relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad) and in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Sakuntala Devi Khetan (2013) 352 ITR 484 (Mad). 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that there is clear difference between rate charged by Kamivisa Products, Puducherry unit and third party supplier M/s. Aeroaroma Home Care Products for very same product…

M/S KAMIVISA PRODUCTS,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT , PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 881/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.881 To 884 & 995/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 & 2012-13)

Section 139(1)Section 80I

…-tax department to adopt different rate only on the basis of third party suppliers rate charged on the products. In this regard, the learned AR relied upon decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs Anandha Metal Corporation (2005) 273 ITR 262 (Mad) and in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Sakuntala Devi Khetan (2013) 352 ITR 484 (Mad). 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that there is clear difference between rate charged by Kamivisa Products, Puducherry unit and third party supplier M/s. Aeroaroma Home Care Products for very same product…

ASHOK KUMAR BANTHIA,BIKANER vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BIKANER

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 297/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavashok Kumar Banthia, Vs. D.C.I.T., Kumharon Ka Mohalla, Central Circle, Gangashahar, Bikaner. Bikaner. Pan No. Aixpb 4919 N Assessee By Shri Suresh Ojha, Adv. & Shri Sudarshan Jhabak, Ca. Revenue By Smt. Sanchita Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 06/09/2021 O R D E R Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-Iv, Jaipur Dated 07/09/2019 For The A.Y. 2012-13 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That The Order Passed By The Assessing Authority & Sustained By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Illegal & Against The Law. 2. That The Order Is Illegal In View Of The Fact That The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) As Well As The Assessing Authority Fails To Cross Examine The Deponent Of The Affidavits Submitted Before The Assessing Officer. In View Of Judgment Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court Delivered In The Case Of M/S Mehta Parekha & Co., The Contents Of The Affidavit Should Have Been Accepted. 3. That The Assessment Completed In The Hands Of The Assessee Is Not Justified Because The Amount Belongs To M/S Lux Industries Limited As Admitted By The Director Of The Company. Therefore, The Assessment Is Illegal.

For Appellant: “1. That the

Section 132Section 143(3)

…Tax Department It will be worthwhile to submit that the sales tax authority accepted the sale belongs to Lux Industries Limited in case which calculation is given in the above. In this respect your kind attention is invited to words the judgment reported in 273 ITR 262 in which it was held that if the sales tax department is accepting in that case the income tax should have accepted the same. The ratio of the judgment is quietly applicable in case of assessee. Application of 153 C of IT Act It will be worthwhile to mention here that assessee requested to transfer the proceeding to the assessing authority of L…