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)

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Shanti Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 751/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Section 132(1)Section 133A

…her submitted that the AO has not furnished the documents relied upon him for making the additions in the hands of the assessees herein. In that case, the AO could not have made these additions as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396)(Del). 15. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. The first common issue in all the appeals filed by the revenue relate to the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, wherein cash credits, which are essentially capital receipts, are deemed to be revenue receipts by legal fiction, if the assessee fails to prove the nature and source…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Realty, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Section 132(1)Section 133A

…her submitted that the AO has not furnished the documents relied upon him for making the additions in the hands of the assessees herein. In that case, the AO could not have made these additions as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396)(Del). 15. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. The first common issue in all the appeals filed by the revenue relate to the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, wherein cash credits, which are essentially capital receipts, are deemed to be revenue receipts by legal fiction, if the assessee fails to prove the nature and source…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Mega Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 749/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Section 132(1)Section 133A

…her submitted that the AO has not furnished the documents relied upon him for making the additions in the hands of the assessees herein. In that case, the AO could not have made these additions as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396)(Del). 15. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. The first common issue in all the appeals filed by the revenue relate to the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, wherein cash credits, which are essentially capital receipts, are deemed to be revenue receipts by legal fiction, if the assessee fails to prove the nature and source…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Poonam Mega Developers, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 748/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Section 132(1)Section 133A

…her submitted that the AO has not furnished the documents relied upon him for making the additions in the hands of the assessees herein. In that case, the AO could not have made these additions as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashwani Gupta (322 ITR 396)(Del). 15. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. The first common issue in all the appeals filed by the revenue relate to the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, wherein cash credits, which are essentially capital receipts, are deemed to be revenue receipts by legal fiction, if the assessee fails to prove the nature and source…

Dev Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 220/AHD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Astha ManiarFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 68

…s. ITO in ITA No. 6492/Mum/2016 (Mum. Tri.) vii) Kishanchand Chelaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) viii) Appropriate Authority vs. Vijay Kumar Sharma 249 ITR 554 (SC) ix) Heirs & LHS of Late Laxmanbhai Patel vs. CIT 327 ITR 290 (Guj) x) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 (Del.) xi) CIT vs. SMC Share Brokers Ltd. 288 ITR 345 (Del.) xii) CIT vs. Geetanjali Education Society 174 Taxman 440 (Raj.) The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the above submissions, the ledger account of M/s R G Textile placed at page no. 79, 80 of the paper book reveals that there is an opening debit balance of Rs. 6,58,3…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1167/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1166/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Raj Enterprises, Surat

ITA 1164/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…ITR 345 (Del.). 28 ITA.No.5064/Del./2017 M/s. K.R. Pulp and Papers Ltd., New Delhi. 4. CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal 293 ITR 43 (Del). 5. CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. 295 ITR 105 (Del). 6. CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta 303 ITR 95 (Del) 7. CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 (Del) 8. CIT v Sunil Aggarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 9. Roger Enterprise Ltd vs. CIT 382 ITR 639 (Del) 10. Ms. Farrah Marker vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA.No.3801/Mum/20111 dated 27.04.2016. 11. Ms. Malti Ghan Shyambhai Patadia vs. ITO ITA.No.3400/Ahd/2015 dated 06.02.2017. 12. M/s Rainbow International (P) Ltd vs. ITO ITA.No.3104/DeI/2013 dated 10.05.2…

Dhairyasheel Pralhad Pawar, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolhapur

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

ITA 310/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us. A.Y. 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 131

…ment made by a person and simply relying on those statements, such proceedings by the Income-tax authorities is devoid of natural justice and thus is invalid and bad in law. 7. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smc Share Brokers Ltd. (2007) 288 ITR 386 (Del) observed that the assessee had made repeated A.Y. 2012-13 requests to the ld. A.O for cross examination of the person on the basis of whose statement proceedings had been launched, so that the assessee could prove its case. These requests were not acceded to by the ld. A.O and the Tribunal had held that this was in complete violation of th…

Gm Overseas, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-48(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1891/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 131ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…roviding opportunity of cross-examination of the persons making statements such additions cannot be sustained:- (i) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE 281 CTR 241 (SC); (ii) Kishinchand Chellaram v. CTT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC); (iii) CIT v. Ashwani Gupta [2010] 322 ITR 396 (Delhi); (iv) CIT vs SMC Share Brokers Ltd 288 ITR 0345 (Del); (v) Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Ltd. vs UOI 51 ITC 210 (SC); (vi) Tin Box Company vs CIT 116,Taxman 419 (SC); (vii) AluDwyandra Kumar Bhattacharya vs Supdt. Of Income Tax 1990 78 STC (393); & (viii) Pr CIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt Ltd in ITA No.13,11,12,20,14,15,16,17,18,…