CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia

352 ITR 493High Court2013#120 most cited

What is CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia authority for?

Section 153A can be invoked to reassess income for all years under consideration prior to a search, even if returns for those years were processed under Section 143(1)(a). The Assessing Officer has the power to reassess total income in such cases without fetters.

537

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Anil Kumar Bhatia · section 153A · section 143(1)(a) · search assessment · reassessment · assessment procedure · undisclosed income · search and seizure · Delhi High Court · taxability after search

Also reported as

24 Taxmann.com 98211 Taxmann 453

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 148Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153aofcasus omissussection 153(1)(a)section 153(1)sanctioning authoritysection 153a(1)(b)section 153a(1)non application of mindsection 153bsection 132asearch assessmentsection 132(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rai Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rai Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rai Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 38/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Gugnani Leasing and Hire P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 37/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Gugnani Leasing and Hire P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 36/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Chennai vs. Rajiv Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 32/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Ojasvi Motor Financ P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 31/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai vs. Ritika Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 28/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai vs. Ritesh Shares & Securities P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rkkr Holdings P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 160/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rkkr Holdings P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 159/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rkkr Holdings P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 158/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(3), Chennai vs. Rkkr Holdings P Ltd, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 157/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)

…T (20 Taxmann.com 214); Hon’ble Delhi High Court (v) Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel vs CIT (31 Taxmann.com 50); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vi) Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs ACIT (76 Taxmann.com 311); Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (vii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (24 Taxmann.com 98); Hon’ble Delhi High Court 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that no additions could have been made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. AR submitted that there was nothing incriminating in the seized material and the documents found by the investigation team were bank statements,…

Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- 3 vs. M/S Pgf Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/530/2019HC Delhi14 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 158Section 158B

…chapter XIV – B which were made inapplicable after 31.05.2003 as per section 158BI of the IT Act? D.Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in not appreciating the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court’s decision in the case of CIT(Central) Kanpur vs. Rajkumar Arora (2014) 211 Taxmann 453 that the assessing officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income which was found during search operation but also with regard to material that was available at the time of original assessment? E. Whether the Ld. ITAT has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without examining the merits of the additi…

Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- 3 vs. M/S Pgf Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/528/2019HC Delhi14 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 158Section 158B

…chapter XIV – B which were made inapplicable after 31.05.2003 as per section 158BI of the IT Act? D.Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in not appreciating the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court’s decision in the case of CIT(Central) Kanpur vs. Rajkumar Arora (2014) 211 Taxmann 453 that the assessing officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income which was found during search operation but also with regard to material that was available at the time of original assessment? E. Whether the Ld. ITAT has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without examining the merits of the additi…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…y dismissed the appeal on this legal issue and had not considered the matter on merits.” 18. In Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Kabul Chawla [(2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi)], Hon’ble Delhi High Court considering the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia [(2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del)], has held thus: “21. Therefore it is clear that the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra) does not deal with a situation where, as in the present case, no incriminating material was found during the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act.” 19. It is significant to note that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Canara Hou…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…y dismissed the appeal on this legal issue and had not considered the matter on merits.” 18. In Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Kabul Chawla [(2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi)], Hon’ble Delhi High Court considering the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia [(2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del)], has held thus: “21. Therefore it is clear that the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra) does not deal with a situation where, as in the present case, no incriminating material was found during the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act.” 19. It is significant to note that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Canara Hou…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…y dismissed the appeal on this legal issue and had not considered the matter on merits.” 18. In Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Kabul Chawla [(2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi)], Hon’ble Delhi High Court considering the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia [(2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del)], has held thus: “21. Therefore it is clear that the decision in CIT V/s. Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra) does not deal with a situation where, as in the present case, no incriminating material was found during the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act.” 19. It is significant to note that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Canara Hou…

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Pvt. Ltd., Koraput

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 83/CTK/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.24-26/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.27-29/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Jami Siva Sai, one of the directors of assesseeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 40A(3)

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/IT(SS)A Nos.04-06/CTK/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 to 2015-2016) ACIT, Central Circle-1, Vs M/s Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 PAN No. : AAJCS 3201 K AND Cross Objection Nos.24-26/CTK/2021 (Arising out of IT(SS)A Nos.04-06/CTK/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Asse…

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Pvt. Ltd., Koraput

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 82/CTK/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.24-26/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.27-29/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Jami Siva Sai, one of the directors of assesseeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 40A(3)

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/IT(SS)A Nos.04-06/CTK/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 to 2015-2016) ACIT, Central Circle-1, Vs M/s Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 PAN No. : AAJCS 3201 K AND Cross Objection Nos.24-26/CTK/2021 (Arising out of IT(SS)A Nos.04-06/CTK/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Asse…