What is CIT v. Ashwani Gupta authority for?

Proceedings become fatal if principles of natural justice are violated, such as when seized material is not provided to the assessee or cross-examination of a person whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon is denied.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Ashwani Gupta?

262 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Ashwani Gupta come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 153D, Section 69B, Section 132(1), Section 14A.

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396)

SUHAS DIGAMBAR CHINCHKAR,PUNE vs. CIT(A) & NFAC, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1651/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1651/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Suhas Digambar Chinchkar, Vs. Ito, National Faceless B- 1005, Bhoomi Allium, Assessment Centre, Near Kokne Chowk, Delhi. Rahatni, Pune- 411017. Pan : Afspc4270R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ritvik Vatsyayan Revenue By : Shri Milind Debaje (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of ₹5,00,000 Under Section 69 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Providing The Appellant An Opportunity To Rebut Or Cross-Examine The Third- Party Material Used Against Him. The Addition Is Based On A Document Allegedly Impounded During A Survey On M/S Swastik

For Appellant: Shri Ritvik VatsyayanFor Respondent: Shri Milind Debaje (Virtual)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 44ASection 69

…e assessee on the basis of which the addition was made. In support of all these contentions, the assessee relied on judgement passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P. V. Kalyanasundaram, [2007] 294 ITR 49 (SC) and CIT vs. Ashvani Gupta [2010] 322 ITR 396 (Delhi). 7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find force in the above arguments of Ld. counsel of the assessee and accordingly, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to reframe the assessment afresh after providi…

NANDKISHORE TELEFILMS & MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 7(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2563/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…1 along with following decisions.\n1. H.R. Metha Vs. ACIT, 387 ITR 561 (Bom HC)\n2. C Vasantlal& co. Vs. CIT, 45 ITR 206 (SC)\n3. KishinchandChellaram Vs. CIT, 125 ITR 713 (SC)\n4. CIT Vs. Ashish International, ITA No. 4299 of 2009.\n5. CIT Vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Bom)\n6.3 It was contented by Ld. AR that in the statement of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt, he\nhas replied regarding unsecured loans to only one party M/s Moraj Building\nconcepts Pvt Ltd., and he has nowhere mentioned the name of the assessee\ncompany. Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt has retracted the statement on 02.09.2016 by\nmaking an affidavit before no…

RAK MAGNUM REALTY LLP,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-20(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4411/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68Section 69C

…on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT in ITA no. 58 of 2001 vide order dated 30/06/2016 wherein Hon'ble High Court placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ashwini Gupta reported in 322 ITR 396 and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of M/s. Andman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in (2015) 62 taxmann.com 3 observed as under : "The Delhi High Court in Ashwani Gupta (supra)held that once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as when its seized material was not provided…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. INDIAN HYDRO ELECTRIC POWER PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 3907/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

…ese two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid Iwo witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show Cause Notice.”  CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta [2010] 322 ITR 396 (Delhi High Court) “the Tribunal has correctly understood the law and applied it to the facts of the case. Once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material is not provided to an assessee nor is cross-examination of the person on whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon, granted, then, such defici…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. INDIAN HYDRO ELECTRIC POWER PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 3906/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

…ese two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid Iwo witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show Cause Notice.”  CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta [2010] 322 ITR 396 (Delhi High Court) “the Tribunal has correctly understood the law and applied it to the facts of the case. Once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material is not provided to an assessee nor is cross-examination of the person on whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon, granted, then, such defici…