Sarosh Yazdani, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stand allowed
ITA 214/CTK/2020[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack03 Nov 2022AY 2008-09
Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiait(Ss)A No A No.53/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year Assessment Years :2004-05 It(Ss)A No A No.54/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year Assessment Years :2005-06 It(Ss)A No A No.55/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year Assessment Years :2007-08 It(Ss)A No A No.67/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year Assessment Years :2006-07 It(Ss)A No A No.68/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year Assessment Years :2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 144
…n in cases where assessment is made on the basis of an estimate". In that decision, all the abovereferred to decisions of this court, which took a similar view earlier have also been referred to. Even in a later decision in CIT vs. Balakrishna Textiles [1992] 193 ITR 561 (Mad) relied on by learned counsel for the Revenue, the same view has been reiterated. The relevant observation therein is as follows: (page 367): "Even if the Revenue had assessed the income at a higher estimate than that furnished by the assessees, it cannot be stated as an inflexible rule that, in all cases, estimated income is not liable to p…