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

Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt.Ltd., Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (In ITA No

ITA 462/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.461 & 462/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S. Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Plot No. 246/1, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat-394221. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr1036R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Malpani, Ca Revenue By : Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14 & 2014-15, Is Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal Nos. Cas/2/69/2016-17 & Cas/2/718/2016-17 Dated 22.05.2018 & 25.05.2018 Respectively, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

For Appellant: Shri Manish Malpani, CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…statement has been recorded by the assessing officer and such statement is proposed to be used by the assessing officer, for this reliance can be placed on the judgment of the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of - CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (Cal.). Besides, the said loan has been repaid by the assessee company in subsequent year, therefore the genuineness of the transaction should not be doubted. Thus, based on the facts ITA Nos.461 & 462/SRT/2018 AYs. 2013-14 to 2014-15 Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt. Ltd. narrated above, and the precedents applicable to these facts, we delete the additions (…

Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt.Ltd., Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (In ITA No

ITA 461/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.461 & 462/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S. Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Plot No. 246/1, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat-394221. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr1036R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Malpani, Ca Revenue By : Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14 & 2014-15, Is Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal Nos. Cas/2/69/2016-17 & Cas/2/718/2016-17 Dated 22.05.2018 & 25.05.2018 Respectively, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

For Appellant: Shri Manish Malpani, CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…statement has been recorded by the assessing officer and such statement is proposed to be used by the assessing officer, for this reliance can be placed on the judgment of the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of - CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (Cal.). Besides, the said loan has been repaid by the assessee company in subsequent year, therefore the genuineness of the transaction should not be doubted. Thus, based on the facts ITA Nos.461 & 462/SRT/2018 AYs. 2013-14 to 2014-15 Rajlaxmi Prints Pvt. Ltd. narrated above, and the precedents applicable to these facts, we delete the additions (…

Dy CIT CC 7 (2), Mumbai vs. M/S Man Global Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee in CO Nos

ITA 7440/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7440/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7533/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7534/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7535/Mum/2019 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2014-15) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7536/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2015-16)

…n held in catena of judicial rulings which includes following namely (i) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chartered Speed Pvt. Ltd vide Tax Appeal No: 126 of 2015 dated 3/03/2015, (ii) CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 and (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vas. Sunita Dhadda 2018 (3) TMI (1610. Then ld AR submitted that besides Chairman 80 | P a g e ITA No. 7482/Mum/2019 & ors M/s M Concepts Retail LLP; AY 15-16 & ors Shri Ramesh Chandar Mansukhani vide statement dated 09/12/2016 has furnished detailed rebuttal and also filed evidences in the form of stock regi…

Shri.B.H.Basha, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1375/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Roumvan Paite, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 69Section 69A

…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.” 28. 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. Th…

Income Tax Officer-3(2), Lucknow vs. M/S Dev Bhoomi Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 116/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2012-13

…(2007) 288 ITR 345 (Del) that though statement of third party had evidentiary value, weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without testing it under cross examination. d) In the case of CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal.) it was held that the cross examination is sine ana non of the due process of taking evidence and no adverse inference can be drawn against a party unless that party is put on notice of the case made out against him. e) It was held in the case of Kishinchand Chettaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) that the amount cannot be assessed as undisclose…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jainam Investments, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…nity which was due in law, in relation to the assessment, and that was sufficient to vitiate the order. The order of reassessment was not valid and was liable to be quashed. 23.12 The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 held as under: ITA. Nos.4286 & 4474/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2016-17 "Cross examination is the sine qua non of due process of taking evidence and no adverse inference can be drawn against a party unless the party is put on notice of the case made out against him. He must be supplied the contents of all such evidence, both oral and documentary, s…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 923/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

…order 29.08.2014. e Hon’ble Rajsthan High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax- I, Jaipur vs. A.L. Lalpuria Construcation (P) Ltd. e¢ Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal.)(HC) ¢ Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sunrise Tooling System (P) Ltd. [2014] 47 TAXMANN 20 (Delhi Court)- “Where Assessing Officer made addition to assessee’s income on basis of statement recorded by director of company in course of survey to effect that said amount represented non-existent transaction, since statement so made did not hav…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 922/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

…order 29.08.2014. e Hon’ble Rajsthan High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax- I, Jaipur vs. A.L. Lalpuria Construcation (P) Ltd. e¢ Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal.)(HC) ¢ Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sunrise Tooling System (P) Ltd. [2014] 47 TAXMANN 20 (Delhi Court)- “Where Assessing Officer made addition to assessee’s income on basis of statement recorded by director of company in course of survey to effect that said amount represented non-existent transaction, since statement so made did not hav…

Smt. Muktaben Nishantbhai Patel, Ankleshwar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2(2), Bharuch

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (In ITA No

ITA 6/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.05 & 06/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Nishantkantilal Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9, Uma Park Society, Near Uma Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Bhavan, Bharuch-393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amepp2505R (Assessee) (Respondent) Smt Muktabennishantbhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9-10, Patel Kubj, Uma Park Society, B/H Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Uma Bhavan, Old Nh No.8, Gidc, Zadeshwar, Ankleshwar -393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Binpp5922N (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.07 & 10/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah -CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla -Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…itness by the adjudicating authority though the statements of those witness were made the basis of impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity. On the same issue, the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (cal) held as follows: “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.” 42.Conclusion: We note that there is no dispute regarding date of purchase of shares. Price of the shar…

Shri Nishant Kantilal Patel, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Bharuch

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (In ITA No

ITA 5/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.05 & 06/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Nishantkantilal Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9, Uma Park Society, Near Uma Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Bhavan, Bharuch-393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amepp2505R (Assessee) (Respondent) Smt Muktabennishantbhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9-10, Patel Kubj, Uma Park Society, B/H Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Uma Bhavan, Old Nh No.8, Gidc, Zadeshwar, Ankleshwar -393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Binpp5922N (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.07 & 10/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah -CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla -Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…itness by the adjudicating authority though the statements of those witness were made the basis of impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity. On the same issue, the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (cal) held as follows: “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.” 42.Conclusion: We note that there is no dispute regarding date of purchase of shares. Price of the shar…

Shri Nishant Kantilal Patel, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Bharuch

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (In ITA No

ITA 10/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.05 & 06/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Nishantkantilal Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9, Uma Park Society, Near Uma Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Bhavan, Bharuch-393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amepp2505R (Assessee) (Respondent) Smt Muktabennishantbhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9-10, Patel Kubj, Uma Park Society, B/H Ward-2(2), Bharuch. Uma Bhavan, Old Nh No.8, Gidc, Zadeshwar, Ankleshwar -393002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Binpp5922N (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.07 & 10/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah -CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla -Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…itness by the adjudicating authority though the statements of those witness were made the basis of impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity. On the same issue, the Hon`ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (cal) held as follows: “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.” 42.Conclusion: We note that there is no dispute regarding date of purchase of shares. Price of the shar…

The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. El Dorado Biotech Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1823/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2020AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Ketan Shah & Aman ShahFor Respondent: Shri M.S.A. Khan, CITDR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…tatement recorded from a third party or loose papers seized from a third party. In all such cases, it is imperative to afford an opportunity to the assessee to cross-examine the said third party." 27. Similarly in CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103, the Hon'ble Calcutta High court held that "Cross-examination is the sine qua non of due process of taking evidence and no adverse inference can be drawn against a party unless the party is put on notice of the case made out against him. He must be supplied the contents of all such evidence, both oral and documentary, so that he can prepare to me…

DCIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. Shri Jugal Kishore Garg(Derewala), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 34/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi, CIT- DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh jes’k lh-'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34, 35, 36 & 37/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 to 2017-18 cuke The DCIT Shri Jugal Kishore Garg (Derewala) Vs. Central Circle - 1 27-A, Agrasen Colony, Jaipur Brahmpuri Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABBPG 4020 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri Ambrish Bedi, CIT- DR fu/kZkfj…

ACIT, Sangrur vs. M/S Aggarsain Fibres Ltd., Samana

In the result, appeal of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 829/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…ack of the assessee was not confronted during the assessment proceedings and that the assessee had furnished detailed reply regarding the point raised by the A.O., reference was made to the following case laws: • CIT Vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103, (Cal), • Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. ltd. Vs. Union of India (1981) 51 Comp Cas 210, 255 (SC) = AIR 1981 SC 818 • Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597 8.4 The Ld. CIT(A) further observed that the assessee furnished justification with reasoning for fall in GP rate which was due to fire at the Factory therefore the current results co…

Shri Atulbhai Babulal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-11, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 966/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountantmember & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.P.Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…tion, it is difficult to believe on the statement of the assessee to ascertain when he was speaking the truth. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprise (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal) wherein it was held that “A man indulging in double-speaking cannot be said by any means a truthful man at any stage-and no court can decide on which occasion he was truthful.” 14.3. Accordingly, the impugned rent cannot be classified as income under the head house property. To tax the rent income under the head house property, there has t…

Shri Atulbhai Babubhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Range-10, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2493/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountantmember & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.P.Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…tion, it is difficult to believe on the statement of the assessee to ascertain when he was speaking the truth. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprise (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal) wherein it was held that “A man indulging in double-speaking cannot be said by any means a truthful man at any stage-and no court can decide on which occasion he was truthful.” 14.3. Accordingly, the impugned rent cannot be classified as income under the head house property. To tax the rent income under the head house property, there has t…

Shri Atul Babubhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT., Range-10, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 76/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountantmember & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.P.Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…tion, it is difficult to believe on the statement of the assessee to ascertain when he was speaking the truth. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Commercial Enterprise (1994) 210 ITR 103 (Cal) wherein it was held that “A man indulging in double-speaking cannot be said by any means a truthful man at any stage-and no court can decide on which occasion he was truthful.” 14.3. Accordingly, the impugned rent cannot be classified as income under the head house property. To tax the rent income under the head house property, there has t…

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1474/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…ported in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee can…

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1473/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…ported in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee can…

Rajda Polymers, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-36, Kolkata

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2414/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 16Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

…rted in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court In the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Ca I) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the Id AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee c…