CIT v. Babulal Nim

47 ITR 864High Court1963#6113 most cited

What is CIT v. Babulal Nim authority for?

Fresh evidence cannot be introduced in appellate proceedings to support a new argument or a new case, as this would circumvent the established assessment process.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Babulal Nim · appellate proceedings · fresh evidence · new case · assessment order · additional evidence · income tax appeal

Judgments citing CIT v. Babulal Nim

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED,KADAPA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra and Shri Nitin Narang, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…d the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." Dealing with the scope of rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP), held that the admissibility of additional evidence under rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidence s…

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED ,KADAPA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2169/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra and Shri Nitin Narang, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…d the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." Dealing with the scope of rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP), held that the admissibility of additional evidence under rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidence s…

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED,KADAPA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra and Shri Nitin Narang, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…d the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." Dealing with the scope of rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP), held that the admissibility of additional evidence under rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidence s…

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED, KADAPA,KADAPA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra and Shri Nitin Narang, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…d the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." Dealing with the scope of rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP), held that the admissibility of additional evidence under rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidence s…

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED, KADAPA,KADAPA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 616/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra and Shri Nitin Narang, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…d the additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." Dealing with the scope of rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP), held that the admissibility of additional evidence under rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidence s…

Y RADHA KUMAR REDDY (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(5), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1759/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri T. Sunil Goutam, DR
Section 143(2)Section 68

…additional evidence so brought on the record will have to be ignored and the case decided as if it is nonexistent." 10. Dealing with the scope of Rule 29, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Babulal Nim, [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) held that the admissibility of additional evidence under Rule 29 depends on whether or not the Tribunal requires it to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause. 11. There is also nothing to suggest from the order of the Tribunal that it had not exercised its discretion properly in refusing to receive the additional evidenc…

SOLITARE WORLD PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2638/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2638/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Solitare World Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Shop No. 6, Second Floor, 2633 & 2634, Central Circle-25, Plot No. 2490250, Gurudwara Road, New Delhi Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaocs1369R Assessee By : Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. & Sh. Hiren Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69C

…im, further AO has stated that that assessee has been unable to reconcile entries with his books of accounts despite being given ample opportunities as stated in penpenultimate & penultimate line of para 9 of assessment order. 1.3. CIT vs. Babulal Nim (1963) 47 ITR 864 (MP), does not enable the assessee or the department to tender fresh evidence to support a new point or to, make out a new case in appellate proceedings. 1.4. Circumstantial evidence that assessee has also surrendered in para 9 of Rs.11.17 lacs ii) The fact that jottings were explained as regards material extent and relevant to additions made a…

SHRI.K.JAIPAL REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1546/BANG/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1545/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1544/BANG/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1543/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1542/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1541/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1540/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1539/BANG/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1538/BANG/2016[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

SHRI.K.NAGESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1537/BANG/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Pooja Maru, CA
Section 132Section 68

…before us today. 4.1 On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR vehemently opposed the admission of additional evidence. He placed reliance on following decisions in support:- i) decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim reported in [1963] 47 ITR 864 (MP) Page 7 of 12 ITA Nos. 1537 to 1546/Bang/2016 ii) decision of Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Kanniappan Murugadoss vs. ITO reported in [2017] 79 taxmann.com 244 (Chennai-Trib.) 4.2 The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that sufficient time was avalabl to assessee during the assessment proceedings however, the same was not provided. He submitted that…

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…y the respondent Revenue, admitted with the leave of Hon’ble Tribunal, provided the same are relevant to the controversy at hand and do not change the complexion of the case / case set up by the AO. [Refer: Motiram v. CIT: 34 ITR 646 (SC); CIT v. Babulal Nim: 47 ITR 864 (MP)] Viewed in the said overall broad conspectus, the appellant seeks to place on record its specific objection against admission of each of the aforesaid additional evidences for the following reasons: Re:Framework Agreement dated 01.03.2006 (a) The aforesaid agreement was executed in 2006 between the appellant along with companies in which the…

M/S. VAILDOR CAPITAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, GURGAON

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

ITA 1979/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. S.D. Kapila, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. T.M. Shivakumar, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 92C

…ission of additional ground at this stage. It was submitted that the appellant could not submit it before the TPO 7 ITA No.1979/Del./2014 either through TP study report or at the time of hearing. He relied on the judgment in the case of CIT vs. Babulal Nim, 47 ITR 864 (MP). 7. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that the appellant has submitted the additional ground of appeal before the Tribunal first time by his application 11.04.2016 for inclusion of two more companies as comparables to determine the arm’s length price but it was not produced before the TPO…

CIT v. Babulal Nim (47 ITR 864) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax