CIT v. Bharat Bhushan Jain

370 ITR 695High Court2015#17855 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 153CSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 143(2)Section 69Section 132(4)Section 132A

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdsection 158bcsection 158bsatisfaction notesection 158section 153csection 153section 153aincriminating materialsection 132search and seizuresection 15

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharat Bhushan Jain

FAYAZ MOHAMMED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1671/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 69

…Act. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) and also the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bharat Bhushan Jain (2015) 370 ITR 695 (Del). The learned counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (supra) submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had clearly stated that for the purpose of section 158BD of the Act, a satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the Assessing Officer before…

PRASHANT SONI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2612/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanprashant Soni, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 7, M-50, First Floor, Delhi. Guru Harkishan Nagar, Sunder Vihar, New Delhi – 110 087. (Pan : Basps5961H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date Of Order : 30.12.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 30.08.2022 For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Raised Legal Issue Relating To Assumption Of Jurisdiction Under Section 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) By Raising Ground Nos.1 & 2 Which Read As Under :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. Ao & Impugned Order Passed By The Cit (A) Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts.

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 292C

…IT v. Calcutta Knitwears reported in 362 ITR 673 and a copy of the circular is placed at pages 86-87 of JPB. The ld. AR of the assessee relied on the following judgments :- 6. (i) Anil Kumar Goptal Krishan Agarwal – 418 ITR 25 (Guj.); (ii) Bharat Bhushan Jain 370 ITR 695 (Del.); (iii) Radhey Shayam Bansal 337 ITR 217 (Del.); 4 7. With regard to the satisfaction recorded by the assessing officer of searched person do not satisfy the rigor of section 153C of the Act and is therefore illegal, invalid and without jurisdiction, he submitted that in respect of seized document made a basis to initiate impugned proceedi…

FAROOQI GULAMSAMDANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 814/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.814/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Farooqi Gulam Samdani, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aispg5022C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-AR
Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 69

…t. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bharat Bhushan Jain (2015) 370 ITR 695 (Del). The learned counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (supra) submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had clearly stated that for the purpose of section 158BD of the Act, a satisfaction note is sine qua non and must be prepared by the Assessing Officer be…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, KOLKATA vs. KRISHNA KUMAR DAGA

ITA/104/2011HC Calcutta20 Aug 2025

Bench: The Tribunal As Well As Before The Lower Authorities Making The Said Order Perverse In Nature”

For Appellant: Mr. Tilak Mitra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate
Section 158Section 158BSection 260A

…ngs initiated under Section 158BD has been done within a reasonable time or is it barred by limitation. On this issue we take guidance from the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Bharat Bhushan Jain, (2015) 370 ITR 695 (Delhi), wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench took note of the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Calcutta Knitwears, (2014) 362 ITR 673 (SC) and held that the revenue has to be vigilant in issuing notice to third party under Section 158BD, immediately after completion of assessment of the searched person an…

SANDEEP KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 300/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Dcit, Sh. Sandeep Kumar Agarwal, 1135, Chatta Madan Gopal, Central Circle-7, Maliwara, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Agtpa3365R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Manju Goel, Ca Department By Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 [In Short, The “Cit(A)”], Delhi’S Order Dated 14.12.2022 Passed In Case No. Cit(A), Delhi-24/10751/2015-16, Involving Proceedings Under Section 153C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. This Assessee’S Appeal Raises The Following Substantive Grounds:

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. DCIT, Sh. Sandeep Kumar Agarwal, 1135, Chatta Madan Gopal, Central Circle-7, Maliwara, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AGTPA3365R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Manju Goel, CA Department by Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 07.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 07.07.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (App…

CIT v. Bharat Bhushan Jain (370 ITR 695) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax