CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises

210 ITR 103High Court1994#440 most cited

What is CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises authority for?

If the Assessing Officer relies on adverse evidence or witness testimony, including statements recorded under Section 132(4), the assessee must be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the witness or source of the evidence, upholding principles of natural justice. An assessment made without such an opportunity may be considered invalid.

205

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises · 210 ITR 103 · Section 132(4) · right to cross-examination · natural justice · adverse evidence · retracted statement · assessment validity · opportunity to examine witness · third party information · Calcutta High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153ASection 147Section 132(4)Section 132Section 148Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 158bb(1)retraction of statementthird party informationsection 158bbassistant directorstatement under section 132(4)section 34section 153c(1)retracted statementsection 292csection 132(4a)price rigging

Judgments citing CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises

Maa Jagdambe Tradelinks Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asstt Comm of Income Tax Circle -12(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1873/MUM/2022[ 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Maa Jagdambe Tradelinks Ltd. Asst. Cit, Circle-12(3)(2) Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, Mumbai A-Wing, Navkar Building, Vs. Yashwant Gaurav Complex, Nalasopara (W), Mumbai -400 101

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkarni
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

…the profits of the assessee has to be recalculated on the basis of the materials made available by the assessee, wherein the A.O. has also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal), where it was held that if the assessee has furnished comparative analysis of gross profit ratio, the department has to rely on the 7 Maa Jagdambe Tradelinks Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT gross profit ratio on the basis of such comparative cases. From perusing the comparative analysis relied on by the assessee, the A.O. observed that gross profit va…

M/S. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalroe vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 533/BANG/2022[N/A]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 269S

…e. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons for re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The reassessment was not valid.” (N). The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir.-2, Surat vs. Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA nos

ITA 195/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.110/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.195/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, Ar Assessee By Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/11/2022

Section 143(3)

…g authority though the statements of those witness were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity. We note that same view was expressed by the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (Cal), wherein it was held that it is a trite law that cross examination is the sine qua non of due process of taking evidence and no adverse inference can be drawn against the party unless the party is put on notice of the case made out against him. Therefore, the addition made by the assessing officer based on the statement of Shri Manoj C. Pat…

Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir., 2, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA nos

ITA 110/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.110/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle-2, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.195/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, K-801, River View Heights, Surat. Peddar Road, Mota Varachha, Surat-394101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb0820M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, Ar Assessee By Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/11/2022

Section 143(3)

…g authority though the statements of those witness were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity. We note that same view was expressed by the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (Cal), wherein it was held that it is a trite law that cross examination is the sine qua non of due process of taking evidence and no adverse inference can be drawn against the party unless the party is put on notice of the case made out against him. Therefore, the addition made by the assessing officer based on the statement of Shri Manoj C. Pat…

M/S. Lalbaba Seamless Tubes Pvt. Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2641/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 68

…n Timber Industries (324) ELT 641. ii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunita Dhadda iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram Paper Book page 482-492. iv) Calcutta High Court in CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103. v) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CCE vs. Shyam Traders reported in the [2016] 333 ELT 389. The Ld. A.R further argued that the assessee has even proved even the source of source of the investments which is not required for the AY 2012-13 as if falls prior to the amendment which is prospective in nature and is applicable for AY 2013…

Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Mehar (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR MkWa- ,e- ,y- ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ,oa MkWa- ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. M.L. MEENA, AM & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 14/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 cuke Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal Income Tax Officer, 114, Raja Colony, Vs. Ward-2(1), New Mandi Road, Jaipur. Dausa-303303. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ASBPK0587D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None (Written Submission) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by :…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 509/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 11.5. Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 508/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 11.5. Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 501/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 11.5. Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 500/BANG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 11.5. Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 499/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

…regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 11.5. Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ind Sing Developers (P) Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 348/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: CA Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…n regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 6.10 Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ind- Sing Developers (P) Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 204/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: CA Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…n regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 6.10 Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ind- Sing Developers (P) Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 203/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: CA Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…n regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 6.10 Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

M/S Ind Sing Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 109/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: CA Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…n regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 6.10 Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

M/S Ind Sing Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 108/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: CA Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…n regarding what happened when the manager appeared in obedience to the summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 6.10 Further, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises, 210 ITR 103 (Cal) held as follows:- “8. We have considered the contesting contentions of the parties. It is true that Shri Sukla has proved to be a shifty person as a witness. At the earlier stages, he claimed all his sales to be genuine but before the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee, he disowned the sales specifically made to the assessee. Thi…

DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S Gunesh India Pvt.Ltd.Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is also partly allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2021[ 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jul 2022
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…discretion in that behalf has not been exercised arbitrarily or capriciously, it is not open to scrutiny in reference proceedings to give rise to a question of law or to a mixed question of law and fact. In case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal.) it was held that where the assessee has given a comparative instance of gross profit rate, it is necessary for the department to come to a finding as to the norm of the gross profit on the basis of comparative cases. Therefore, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to counter the comparative statement cited by the assessee before he can…

M/S Ganesh (India)Pvt.Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT CC-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is also partly allowed

ITA 21/JPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…discretion in that behalf has not been exercised arbitrarily or capriciously, it is not open to scrutiny in reference proceedings to give rise to a question of law or to a mixed question of law and fact. In case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal.) it was held that where the assessee has given a comparative instance of gross profit rate, it is necessary for the department to come to a finding as to the norm of the gross profit on the basis of comparative cases. Therefore, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to counter the comparative statement cited by the assessee before he can…

Nishat Ara, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

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

ITA 65/LKW/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Jul 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…e Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) where it has held that an opportunity of cross examination must be provided to the assessee. 6.8. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Kol HC) held as follows: “As a matter of fact, the right to cross-examination a witness adverse to the assessee is an indispensable right and the opportunity of such cross-examination is one of the cornerstones of natural justice”. 6.9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006 (2015 (3…

Zain Alam, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- II, Kanpur

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

ITA 64/LKW/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Jul 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…e Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) where it has held that an opportunity of cross examination must be provided to the assessee. 6.8. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Kol HC) held as follows: “As a matter of fact, the right to cross-examination a witness adverse to the assessee is an indispensable right and the opportunity of such cross-examination is one of the cornerstones of natural justice”. 6.9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006 (2015 (3…