CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin

72 Taxmann.com 139High Court2016#7167 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also reported as

388 ITR 608

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 139(1)Section 44ADSection 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80A(5)Section 80AC

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(7)section 10basection 158b(b)section 80a(5)section 153a(1)(a)fresh tangible materialsection 80ia(4)section 158bbdeduction under section 80iasection 10bsection 80acdeduction u/s 80ia

Judgments citing CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin

RAJ KUMAR & CO,NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAWANSHAHR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 641/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, Adv
Section 115Section 115BSection 144Section 250Section 68

…ed at fair percentage on sales, it is not open to the AO to rely upon the same rejected books of accounts, to make additions and or disallowance on other heads of expenditure. 25. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bahubali Neminath Muttin 388 ITR 608 (Karnataka HC) has observed as follows: relevant portion reproduced: “Alternatively, and without prejudice to the preliminary objections raised above, he would submit that, on merits it should be noted that admittedly the books of accounts of the respondent have been rejected by the assessing authority. The profit of the respondent is estimated…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 – AY : 2012-13 ITA No. 268/Coch/2021 – AY : 2013-14 ITA No. 269/Coch/2021 – AY : 2015-16 ITA No. 270/Coch/2021 – AY : 2016-17 ITA No. 271/Coch/2021 – AY : 2014-15 Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 602, Shiv Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403001 [PAN: AACCR7201F] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Respondent by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement:…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 – AY : 2012-13 ITA No. 268/Coch/2021 – AY : 2013-14 ITA No. 269/Coch/2021 – AY : 2015-16 ITA No. 270/Coch/2021 – AY : 2016-17 ITA No. 271/Coch/2021 – AY : 2014-15 Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 602, Shiv Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403001 [PAN: AACCR7201F] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Respondent by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement:…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 – AY : 2012-13 ITA No. 268/Coch/2021 – AY : 2013-14 ITA No. 269/Coch/2021 – AY : 2015-16 ITA No. 270/Coch/2021 – AY : 2016-17 ITA No. 271/Coch/2021 – AY : 2014-15 Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 602, Shiv Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403001 [PAN: AACCR7201F] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Respondent by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement:…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 – AY : 2012-13 ITA No. 268/Coch/2021 – AY : 2013-14 ITA No. 269/Coch/2021 – AY : 2015-16 ITA No. 270/Coch/2021 – AY : 2016-17 ITA No. 271/Coch/2021 – AY : 2014-15 Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 602, Shiv Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403001 [PAN: AACCR7201F] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Respondent by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement:…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 – AY : 2012-13 ITA No. 268/Coch/2021 – AY : 2013-14 ITA No. 269/Coch/2021 – AY : 2015-16 ITA No. 270/Coch/2021 – AY : 2016-17 ITA No. 271/Coch/2021 – AY : 2014-15 Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. ........................ Appellant 602, Shiv Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403001 [PAN: AACCR7201F] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode ........................ Respondent Appellant by: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Respondent by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 04.06.20…

ASHITA GHELANI,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-59(4), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 947/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ashita Ghelani, Vs. ITO, 22, Gujarat Vihar, Ward-59(4), Vikas Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AHNPG0939J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hiren Mehta, CA Revenue by : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2023 ORDER PER C.M. GARG, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 16.02.2015 of the CIT(A)-19, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2007…

SMT. LIZY GEORGE,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 398/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri V Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2005-06 Smt. Lizy George, The Asst. Commissioner of Rep. by LR Shri Anoop Income-tax, Chemmanur, Circle-7(1), Chemmanur Jewellers, Bengaluru. Chemmanur Enclave, Vs. Marathahalli, Bengaluru. PAN – ADAPG 3712 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri V Ravishankar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 29.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 26.10.2022 O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This app…

THE ITO, WARD-1,, NA vs. ARIVS.SHRI ANILKUMAR AMRUTLAL CHAHWALA, NAVSARI

In the result, this ground of appeal is rejected

ITA 1003/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2078/Ahd/2010 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1003/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Amrutlal Chahwala, Ward-(1), Navsari. 102, Trimurti Complex, Vijalpore, Navsari. [Pan: Abnpc 6308 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e Ld. AR for the assessee relied on the following decisions;  Teja Construction Vs ACIT (2010) 129 TTJ 57 Hyd (URO),  CIT Vs Santosh Jain (2008) 266 ITR 324 ( P& H),  CIT Vs Banwari Lal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All),  CIT Vs Bahubali N Muttin (2016) 388 ITR 608 (Kar),  Malpani House of stone Vs CIT (2017) 395 ITR 385 (Raj) and  Bipinchandra Hiralal Thakkar Vs ITO (2021) 187 ITD 477 (Surat-Trib) Anil Kumar A.Chahwala (AY 2006-07 & 2007-08) 24. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the orders of Lower Authorities. We have also deliberated on various decisions, copies o…

NILKANTHA SAHA,MORIGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-MORIGAON, MORIGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 88/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Feb 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133Section 133ASection 68

…ITA No. 88/GAU/2020 Nilkantha Saha A.Y. 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GAUHATI BENCH: GUWAHATI “VIRTUAL HEARING” AT KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 88/Gau/2020 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nilkantha Saha Vs. ITO, Ward-Morigaon, Morigaon (PAN: AHPPS4207H) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 15.01.2021 Date of Pronouncement 17.02.2021 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, A.R For the Respondent Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT ORDER This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)- Guwahati-1, dated 02.03.2020 for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The sole…

NALLURPALLI UNNIKRISHNAN SRINIVAS,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1343/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri. N. U. Srinivas, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Prop: Shree Ayyappa Tourist, Income-Tax, No.646, Muniyappa Building, Circle – 6(3)(1), Kiadb Road, Jalahalli Cross, Bengaluru. T. Dasarahalli, Bengaluru – 560 057. Pan : Adbps 8802 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. G. S. Prashanth, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Jcit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2020 O R D E R Per A.K. Garodiathis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-6, Bengaluru, Dated 31.01.2017 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: Page 2 Of 11

For Appellant: Shri. G. S. Prashanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri. N. U. Srinivas, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Prop: Shree Ayyappa Tourist, Income-Tax, No.646, Muniyappa Building, Circle – 6(3)(1), KIADB Road, Jalahalli Cross, Bengaluru. T. Dasarahalli, Bengaluru – 560 057. PAN : ADBPS 8802 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. G. S. Prashanth, CA Revenue by : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing : 07.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 16.10.2020 O R D E R Per A.K. Garod…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 4287/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.Narasimha

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Pramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT v. President Industries 124Taxman.com 654; (ii) CIT v. Sameer Synthetics Mill 362 ITR 410; (iii) CIT v. Leo Formulation Pvt. Ltd. 48 Taxmann.com 328; (iv) CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin 72 Taxmann.com 139 (v) CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jal) 156 Taxmann.40. 39. So far as the observation of the CIT(A) that the assessee did not produce any material in support of its contention that undisclosed income of Rs.1.85 crore voluntarily declared in the return filed in response to section 153A notice is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee subm…

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 2801/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.Narasimha

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Pramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT v. President Industries 124Taxman.com 654; (ii) CIT v. Sameer Synthetics Mill 362 ITR 410; (iii) CIT v. Leo Formulation Pvt. Ltd. 48 Taxmann.com 328; (iv) CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin 72 Taxmann.com 139 (v) CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jal) 156 Taxmann.40. 39. So far as the observation of the CIT(A) that the assessee did not produce any material in support of its contention that undisclosed income of Rs.1.85 crore voluntarily declared in the return filed in response to section 153A notice is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee subm…

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 169/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.Narasimha

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Pramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT v. President Industries 124Taxman.com 654; (ii) CIT v. Sameer Synthetics Mill 362 ITR 410; (iii) CIT v. Leo Formulation Pvt. Ltd. 48 Taxmann.com 328; (iv) CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin 72 Taxmann.com 139 (v) CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jal) 156 Taxmann.40. 39. So far as the observation of the CIT(A) that the assessee did not produce any material in support of its contention that undisclosed income of Rs.1.85 crore voluntarily declared in the return filed in response to section 153A notice is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee subm…

SHRI B BASAVARAJU ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), MYSORE

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

ITA 1610/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…is which has been accepted by the revenue and therefore addition in respect of stock is not sustainable and emphasized that when there is an estimation, no addition can be made on stock difference and relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Bahubali Neminath Muttin 388 ITR 608 (Kar) whereas the CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the addition without considering the fact that the assessee has filed the Balance Sheet to the Bank for obtaining loan and whereas there is a difference in the Balance Sheet filed for the Income Tax purpose which could not be reconciled. 4 Further the learned Authorised Representative emphasized on th…

ACIT, CIR-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SHIW BINOD GUPTA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 964/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Oct 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 133A

…that reason that the AO has resorted to estimation of profit earned by the assessee on the overall sales. We find that this proposition is duly supported by the following judgments: - CIT vs. Agarwal Engg& Co. Ltd (302 ITR 246) (P&H HC) - CIT Vs B.N. Muttin (388 ITR 608) (Kar HC) - Indwell Constructions Vs. CIT (232 ITR 776) (AP HC) 9. Considering the above decisions and the facts of the case before us, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A)holding that no further additions/ disallowance on account of specific item of expenses is permissible when the Gross profit rate of gross receipts are…

CIT v. Bahubali Neminath Muttin (72 Taxmann.com 139) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax