CIT v. Ashwani Gupta

322 ITR 396High Court2010#321 most cited

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.

262

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta · Ashwani Gupta · section 153A · section 143(3) · section 132(1) · natural justice · cross-examination · seized material · retracted statement · denial of opportunity · fatal proceedings

Also reported as

191 Taxmann 51

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69BSection 132(1)Section 14ASection 56(2)(x)Section 80IC
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 115adsection 153a proceedingssection 2(1a)section 2(1)section 66section 60section 63section 2(14)(iii)settlement applicationsection 245d(4)retracted statementsection 245d

Judgments citing CIT v. Ashwani Gupta

P Mittal Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6906/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Anmol Sinha, Adv. & Sh. AshviniFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

…correctness of the statement and wanted to cross examine the witness which was not given by the AO as well as ld. CIT(A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Delhi) while dealing with the issue of not providing the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses has held in para 5 to 7 as under :- Thus the Hon’ble High Court has held that once there is a violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material is not provided to the assessee nor is cross examination of the person on whose st…

Seema Tayal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1132/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 68

…essment so made is vitiated in law and addition so made is liable to be deleted as such. Reliance was placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (i) Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (iii) Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. He further, relied on various case laws on the proposition that once the shares are sold through stock exchange and sufficient 9 documentary evidences have been produced in order to support the genuineness of the LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38), hence, additi…

Asha Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6483/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…tion so sustained is vitiated in law and addition so made is liable to be deleted as such. Reliance was placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (i) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (ii) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (iii) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 9. Ld. Counsel further relied on various case laws on the proposition that once the shares are sold through stock exchange and sufficient documentary evidences have been produced in order to support the genuineness of the LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38), hence,…

Namrata Sehgal Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6482/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…tion so sustained is vitiated in law and addition so made is liable to be deleted as such. Reliance was placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (i) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (ii) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (iii) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 9. Ld. Counsel further relied on various case laws on the proposition that once the shares are sold through stock exchange and sufficient documentary evidences have been produced in order to support the genuineness of the LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38), hence,…

Shruti Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6481/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…tion so sustained is vitiated in law and addition so made is liable to be deleted as such. Reliance was placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (i) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (ii) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (iii) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 9. Ld. Counsel further relied on various case laws on the proposition that once the shares are sold through stock exchange and sufficient documentary evidences have been produced in order to support the genuineness of the LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38), hence,…

Swati Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 51(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of all the above four assessees, namely, Smt

ITA 6480/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) and Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…tion so sustained is vitiated in law and addition so made is liable to be deleted as such. Reliance was placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (i) KishinchandChellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (ii) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (iii) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 9. Ld. Counsel further relied on various case laws on the proposition that once the shares are sold through stock exchange and sufficient documentary evidences have been produced in order to support the genuineness of the LTCG claimed as exempt under section 10(38), hence,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 752/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Central Circle-18, W-82A, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 153C

…2.2008. Reliance is placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (a) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) reported in 397 ITR 82. (b) Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (c) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) DCIT Vs. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, (d) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 11.9 That further, it was submitted that even the statement of Sh. S.K. Gupta so relied on by the Revenue, cannot be relied on, as Sh. Gupta had retracted the said statement by filing an affidavit dated 27.02.2009 (at pages 36 to 39 of PB…

Naozer Bejon Baldawala, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(2), Mumbai

In the result allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 72/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…itself amounts to infringement of „legal rights‟ of the assessee which caused prejudice to the rights in this context. While reaching to this conclusion, we also draw strength from the judgment of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vrs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 (Del). After considering the judgments cited by both the parties, we find that Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal Vrs. CIT 1981 131(ITR) Page 451 has held that the duty of the Tribunal does not end with making a declaration that the assessments are illegal and it is duty bound to issue further directions. The appellate authority…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 288/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 287/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nitin Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 286/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 126/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 125/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 124/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 124 to 126/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, cuke The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shop No. 8-9, Ganesh Income Tax, Nagar-VIA, Near Nadi Ka Central Circle-3, Room No. Phatak, Benad Road, NA-102, New Central Jhotwara, Jaipur. Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:…

Raj Karan Dassani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2346/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2346/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Raj Karan Dassani......………………..………………………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [Pan : Adnpd 8826 B] Ito, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Respondent.

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 16Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 2346/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Raj Karan Dassani......………………..………………………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [PAN : ADNPD 8826 B] ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances by: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appearing on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : March 13, 2019 Date of pronouncing the orde…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1205/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…ctory prices remain static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross- examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them”. ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ashwani Gupta, 2010 322 ITR 396 (Del); The Delhi High Court held that once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as when its seized material was not provided to an assessee nor was he permitted to cross examine a person on whose statement the Assessing Officer relied, it would amount to deficiency, amounting to a denial of opportunity and therefore…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1188/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…ctory prices remain static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross- examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them”. ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ashwani Gupta, 2010 322 ITR 396 (Del); The Delhi High Court held that once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as when its seized material was not provided to an assessee nor was he permitted to cross examine a person on whose statement the Assessing Officer relied, it would amount to deficiency, amounting to a denial of opportunity and therefore…

M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1053/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…ctory prices remain static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross- examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them”. ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ashwani Gupta, 2010 322 ITR 396 (Del); The Delhi High Court held that once there is a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as when its seized material was not provided to an assessee nor was he permitted to cross examine a person on whose statement the Assessing Officer relied, it would amount to deficiency, amounting to a denial of opportunity and therefore…

Prity Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 32(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8245/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Aashna Capital Services (P) Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Ltd., New Delhi C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahca2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Nishank Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Prity Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Ahepg6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…orrectness of the statement and wanted to cross examine the witness which was not given by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Delhi) while dealing with the issue of not providing the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses has held in para 5 to 7 as under :- Thus the Hon’ble High Court has held that once there is a violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material is not provided to the assessee nor is cross examination of the person on whose s…

Nishank Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 32(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8244/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Aashna Capital Services (P) Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Ltd., New Delhi C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahca2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Nishank Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Prity Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Ahepg6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…orrectness of the statement and wanted to cross examine the witness which was not given by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Delhi) while dealing with the issue of not providing the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses has held in para 5 to 7 as under :- Thus the Hon’ble High Court has held that once there is a violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material is not provided to the assessee nor is cross examination of the person on whose s…