CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa

386 ITR 483High Court2016#176 most cited

What is CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa authority for?

If no incriminating material is found during a search operation regarding a particular issue, then no addition can be made concerning that issue in an assessment under section 153A of the Income-tax Act.

416

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa · Gurinder Singh Bawa · 386 ITR 483 · Section 153A · Section 132 · incriminating material · no addition · search assessment scope · assessment in search cases · undisclosed income

Also reported as

79 Taxmann.com 398

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

section 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 153(a)casus omissussection 158bbaccumulated profitsdeemed dividendretracted statementsection 2(22)section 2(22)(e)section 153a(1)section 132a

Judgments citing CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa

Prashant Madhusudan Mahagaokar, Thane vs. DCIT CC 2, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Appellant for Assessment Year

ITA 1243/MUM/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…he absence of incriminating material as has been held in the following judgments by the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court. - CIT – II, Thane Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) - CIT Central –II, Mumbai Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 (Bom) - CIT Vs. SKS Ispat & Power Ltd. 398 ITR 584 (Bom) 8. Responding to the above, the Learned Departmental Representative vehemently contended that the Appellant has challenged the validity of the additions made on the ground of absence of incriminating material for the first time in appellate proceeding before the Tribunal and this ground was…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S N. M. Agrofood Products Pvt. Ltd., Sriganganagar

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 53/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…terial recovered and no undisclosed income was determinable from material found as result search. Once there no incriminating material in support of the addition brought record by revenue, then no addition u/s 68 could be made. CIT Gurinder Singh Bawa [2016] 386 ITR 483 (Bom.) (HC) In this case assessee's return for AY 2005-06 was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. notice 143(2) was issued. search was conducted u/s 132 and in proceedings u/s 153A, AO additions for assessment year question of the sums declared as gifts by the assessee treating them as credits covered u/s and part of the loan receiv…

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. Jay Ketan Parikh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1225/MUM/2022[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 1(2) V. Jay Ketan Parikh Room No. 906, 9Th Floor 94-D, Thanee Heights Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe 66, Nepean Sea Road Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaipp6681J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By : Shri Achal Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…bated assessment which have become final, if no incriminating material is found during the course of search. This legal proposition is further reiterated by various High Courts, including the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483(Bom), where it was held that once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending, then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under section 153A of the Act.” Similar ratio has been laid down in the case of Shri Biswanath Garodia vs. DCIT (supra). The operative part whereof is reproduced as under: 7 Jay…

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. Jay Ketan Parikh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1223/MUM/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 1(2) V. Jay Ketan Parikh Room No. 906, 9Th Floor 94-D, Thanee Heights Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe 66, Nepean Sea Road Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaipp6681J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By : Shri Vranda U. Matkari

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkari
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…bated assessment which have become final, if no incriminating material is found during the course of search. This legal proposition is further reiterated by various High Courts, including the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483(Bom), where it was held that once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending, then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under section 153A of the Act.” Similar ratio has been laid down in the case of Shri Biswanath Garodia vs. DCIT (supra). The operative part whereof is reproduced as under: 7 Jay…

Shri Ajay Virendra Arora, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1706/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleshri Ajay Virender Arora V. Dcit – Central Circle – 6(4) S-14, 6Th Floor Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor Solitaire Corporate Park Air India Building, Nariman Guru Govindji Marg, Chakala Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 Pan: Addpa6742R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Central Circle – 6(4) V. Shri Ajay Virender Arora Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor S-14, 6Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Solitaire Corporate Park Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Guru Govindji Marg, Chakala Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 Pan: Addpa6742R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain & Shri Ravikanth Pathak Department By : Smt. Shailja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain &For Respondent: Smt. Shailja Rai
Section 127(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Ajay Virender Arora v. DCIT – Central Circle – 6(4) S-14, 6th Floor Room No. 1925, 19th Floor Solitaire Corporate Park Air India Building, Nariman Guru Govindji Marg, Chakala Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 PAN: ADDPA6742R (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT – Central Circle – 6(4) v. Shri Ajay Virender Arora Room No. 1925, 19th Floor S-14, 6th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Solitaire Corporate Park Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Guru…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 27/CHNY/2012[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 26/CHNY/2012[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 25/CHNY/2012[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2005-2006

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 24/CHNY/2012[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 23/CHNY/2012[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 22/CHNY/2012[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 21/CHNY/2012[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2001-2002

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’बी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.21/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2001-02) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.22/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2002-03) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.23/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2003-04) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.24/Chny/2012 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Years: 2004-05) & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.25/Chny/2012 (…

S.Ashokan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 601/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.596, 600 & 601/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2010-11 & 2008-09) Mr. S.Ashokan, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal Central Circle-Iii(1) Chennai-600 056. Chennai. Pan: Aacpa 7676C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. M.Rajan,CITFor Respondent: 29.03.2022
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…found during the course of search qua, each assessment year. This legal position is further supported by the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Pvt.Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa, 386 ITR 483 (Bom). In this case, there is no dispute with regard to fact that there is no incriminating materials qua, additions made by the Assessing Officer towards additions towards cash payments u/s.40A(3) of the Act and additions towards difference in closing stock. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the additions made by the Assessing Of…

S.Ashokan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 596/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.596, 600 & 601/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2010-11 & 2008-09) Mr. S.Ashokan, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal Central Circle-Iii(1) Chennai-600 056. Chennai. Pan: Aacpa 7676C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. M.Rajan,CITFor Respondent: 29.03.2022
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…found during the course of search qua, each assessment year. This legal position is further supported by the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Pvt.Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa, 386 ITR 483 (Bom). In this case, there is no dispute with regard to fact that there is no incriminating materials qua, additions made by the Assessing Officer towards additions towards cash payments u/s.40A(3) of the Act and additions towards difference in closing stock. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the additions made by the Assessing Of…

S.Ashokan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 600/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.596, 600 & 601/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2010-11 & 2008-09) Mr. S.Ashokan, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal Central Circle-Iii(1) Chennai-600 056. Chennai. Pan: Aacpa 7676C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. M.Rajan,CITFor Respondent: 29.03.2022
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…found during the course of search qua, each assessment year. This legal position is further supported by the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Pvt.Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa, 386 ITR 483 (Bom). In this case, there is no dispute with regard to fact that there is no incriminating materials qua, additions made by the Assessing Officer towards additions towards cash payments u/s.40A(3) of the Act and additions towards difference in closing stock. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the additions made by the Assessing Of…

ACIT CC 22 & 30, Mumbai vs. Murarilal Mittal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6808/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6808/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Acit Cc –22, Shri Murarilal Mittal, R. No. 404, 4Th Floor, 1601, Marathon बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Heights, P. B. Marg Mumbai-400 020 Jaibharat Oil Mill, Vs. Lower Parel(W), Mumbai-400 013 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Ahnpm8021D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Murli Mohan, Ld. Dr By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, Ld. Ar By सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 18.05.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 18.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Impugned Order Dated 24.08.2014 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-39, Mumbai For The Quantum Appeal Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S

For Appellant: Shri Murli MohanFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…urarilal Mittal Bombay High Court in the cases of; CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation, reported in (2015) 374 ITR 645; CIT vs. SKS Ispat & Power Ltd. Reported in 99 Taxman. Com 424; CIT vs. Deepak Agarwal 86 Taxman. Com 3; CIT vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483. 12. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO u/s 68 for Rs. 57,86,609/- is unsustainable on the ground that it is beyond the scope of assessment u/s 153A. Accordingly, the ground of the appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed. 13. Since, we have already deleted the additions on the legal ground of order of Ld. CIT(A) on merits, deleting the s…

DCIT, CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Rajenderkumar Miglani, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2925/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-5(4) बिधम/ Rajindrakumar Miglani Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Air India Building, Nariman Road, Carnac Bunder, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400009. & Cross Objection No.20/Mum/2021 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Rajindrakumar Miglani बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-5(4) Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Road, Carnac Bunder, Air India Building, Nariman Mumbai-400009. Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpm7288D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Sanjeev Kashyp (Dr) Assessee By: Shri K Shivaram & Rahul Hakani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal As Well As Cross-Objection Against The Order Dated 25.02.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010-11. C.O. No.20/Mum2021 A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K Shivaram & Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyp (DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…d. {2016] 387 ITR 529/[(2017] 81 Taxmann.com 292, Pr. CIF v. Desai Construction (P.} Ltd.{2016} 387 ITR §52/({2017)} 81 taxmann.com 271 (Guj.), CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwa2017} 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22/398 ITR 586 (Bom.), CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawaj2016] 386 ITR 483/[{2017] 79 taxmann.com 398 (Bom.} and decision of Hon'ble Dethi High Court im the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573/234 Taxmann 300/61 taxmann.com.412. 6 C.O. No.20/Mum2021 A.Y.2010-11 In the case of CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa the Hon’ble Bombay High Court noted and made reference to its earlier decision in the case of CIT v. Contine…

D' Decor Exports P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1057/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 127(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ial. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed on following judgments: > Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd [374 ITR 645 Bom] > Deepak Kumar Agarwal [398 ITR 586 Bom] > SKS Ispat & Power Ltd [398 ITR 584 Bom] > Gurinder Singh Bawa [386 ITR 483 Bom] 1.3 The learned CIT(DR) referred page 123 of the paper book and stated that some blank bills were found during the course of search action which constitute incriminating material to justify the additions/disallowance. Copies of these bills have been produced before Your Honour during the course of hearing and the said bills have been shown t…

D' Decor Exports P.L Td, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1056/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 127(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ial. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed on following judgments: > Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd [374 ITR 645 Bom] > Deepak Kumar Agarwal [398 ITR 586 Bom] > SKS Ispat & Power Ltd [398 ITR 584 Bom] > Gurinder Singh Bawa [386 ITR 483 Bom] 1.3 The learned CIT(DR) referred page 123 of the paper book and stated that some blank bills were found during the course of search action which constitute incriminating material to justify the additions/disallowance. Copies of these bills have been produced before Your Honour during the course of hearing and the said bills have been shown t…

D' Decor Exports P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 127(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ial. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed on following judgments: > Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd [374 ITR 645 Bom] > Deepak Kumar Agarwal [398 ITR 586 Bom] > SKS Ispat & Power Ltd [398 ITR 584 Bom] > Gurinder Singh Bawa [386 ITR 483 Bom] 1.3 The learned CIT(DR) referred page 123 of the paper book and stated that some blank bills were found during the course of search action which constitute incriminating material to justify the additions/disallowance. Copies of these bills have been produced before Your Honour during the course of hearing and the said bills have been shown t…