CIT v. Hotel Meriya

332 ITR 537High Court2011#731 most cited

What is CIT v. Hotel Meriya authority for?

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) during a search, along with seized documents, constitutes evidence under the Income-tax Act read with the Indian Evidence Act, making such evidence admissible for search assessments.

139

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hotel Meriya · Section 132(4) · statement during search · admissibility of evidence · search assessment · seized documents · Income-tax Act evidence · scope of statement under 132(4) · 332 ITR 537 · Evidence Act Section 3

Also reported as

195 Taxmann 459

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 142(1)Section 69CSection 68
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 181section 24asection 56(2)(vii)(c)section 153a(b)section 245c(1)section 245d(1)section 114(e)section 79section 193section 65b(4)section 17(2)section 158bb

Judgments citing CIT v. Hotel Meriya

Shashi Agarwal, Lucknow vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Lucknow

In the result, these two appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 68Section 69Section 69C

…also submitted that the impugned appellate orders of the learned CIT(A) also took support from decisions reported in CIT vs. K. P. Ummer 413 ITR 251 (Kar), CIT vs. Ormo Marble Palace P Ltd. 308 CTR 584 (Ker.), Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Center vs. DCIT 362 ITR 664 (Ker.) and E. N. Gopakumar [2016] 75 taxmann.com 215 (Kerala). However, he fairly conceded that orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid cases of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell (supra) and Dy. CIT vs. U. K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. (supra) were not available at the time when assessment orders passed by Assessing…

Rajesh Products, Tonk, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 626/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Jain, CA (Th. V.C)For Respondent: Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnu, (CIT-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ent during the survey proceedings. Further, regarding the legal principles to examine the validity of the retraction of statement, guidance is taken from the following judgements Commissioner of Income-tax v. Hotel Meriya [2010] 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala)/[2011] 332 ITR 537 (Kerala) [26-05-2010] What is evidence? We shall examine it first. Evidence is defined in section 3 of the Evidence Act as follows: "Evidence": "Evidence" means and includes (1) all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fluct under inquiry, such statements are called oral evide…

Shri Ashok Bhawarlal Jain, Pune vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1123/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: S/Shri Pawan Chakrapani &For Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 153A

…(Punj. & Har.), Bachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punj. & Har.), Rameshchandra & Co., vs. CIT [1987] 35 Taxman 153/168 ITR 375 (Bom.), Dr. S.C. Gupta vs. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252/248 ITR 782 (All.), CIT vs. Hotel Meriya [2010] 195 Taxman 459/[2011] 332 ITR 537 (Ker.), CIT vs. O. Abdul Razak [2012] 20 taxmann.com 48/207 Taxman 193 (Mag)/[2013] 350 ITR 71 (Ker.).” Similarly, therefore, these grounds of appeal filed by the appellant- assessee stands dismissed. 13. However, we find that the Assessing Officer adopted pick and choose method while framing the assessment. It is a well settled position of law…

Shri Ashok Bhawarlal Jain, Pune vs. ACIT Central Circle 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1122/PUN/2023[A.Y- 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: S/Shri Pawan Chakrapani &For Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 153A

…(Punj. & Har.), Bachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punj. & Har.), Rameshchandra & Co., vs. CIT [1987] 35 Taxman 153/168 ITR 375 (Bom.), Dr. S.C. Gupta vs. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252/248 ITR 782 (All.), CIT vs. Hotel Meriya [2010] 195 Taxman 459/[2011] 332 ITR 537 (Ker.), CIT vs. O. Abdul Razak [2012] 20 taxmann.com 48/207 Taxman 193 (Mag)/[2013] 350 ITR 71 (Ker.).” Similarly, therefore, these grounds of appeal filed by the appellant- assessee stands dismissed. 13. However, we find that the Assessing Officer adopted pick and choose method while framing the assessment. It is a well settled position of law…

Mr. Anil Kantilal Shah, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-51, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse vide

ITA 228/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.227 & 228/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2018-19 To 2020-21)

For Appellant: Anil ThakrarFor Respondent: Ashok Kumar Kardam
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 69B

…This position laid down in catena of decisions by the various High Courts in Lekh Raj Dhunna (supra), Bachittar Singh (supra), Rameshchandra & Co. v. CIT [1987] 35 Taxman 153/168 TR 375 (Bom) Dr SC Gupta (supra), CIT v. Hotel Menya (2010) 195 Taxman 459/2011) 332 ITR 537 (Ker), O. Abdul Razak (supra). 8.1.2 Similarly, in the case of Sinhagad Technical Education Society V DCIT [2022] 139 taxmann.com 270 (Pune Trib.) the Hon'ble Pune ITAT also had the occasion to examine a similar case of disclosure u/s 132(4) and later retraction. The Hon'ble ITAT held that on careful examination of the so called retraction statem…

Mr. Anil Kantilal Shah, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-51, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse vide

ITA 227/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.227 & 228/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2018-19 To 2020-21)

For Appellant: Anil ThakrarFor Respondent: Ashok Kumar Kardam
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 69B

…This position laid down in catena of decisions by the various High Courts in Lekh Raj Dhunna (supra), Bachittar Singh (supra), Rameshchandra & Co. v. CIT [1987] 35 Taxman 153/168 TR 375 (Bom) Dr SC Gupta (supra), CIT v. Hotel Menya (2010) 195 Taxman 459/2011) 332 ITR 537 (Ker), O. Abdul Razak (supra). 8.1.2 Similarly, in the case of Sinhagad Technical Education Society V DCIT [2022] 139 taxmann.com 270 (Pune Trib.) the Hon'ble Pune ITAT also had the occasion to examine a similar case of disclosure u/s 132(4) and later retraction. The Hon'ble ITAT held that on careful examination of the so called retraction statem…

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 173/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 171/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 171 to 173/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 cuke The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Royal Jewellers, Vs. tax, 1756, Telipara, Chaura Central Circle-02, Jaipur Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFR 6642 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh…

Shri. Kudlur Ramaswamy Sathyanarayana, Mysuru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mysuru

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

ITA 28/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Kudlur Ramaswamy Sathyanarayana, The Assistant No. 1036-20, 4Th Main, Commissioner Of Vidyanarayanapuram, Income Tax, Mysuru. Mysuru. Vs. Pan: Ajops2226B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Sridhar, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 20-03-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-03-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.11.2022 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore For A.Y. 2015- 16 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-11, Bengaluru In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 11/Bng/12385/2018-19 Dated:17.11.2022 In Din: Itba/Apl/M/250/2022-23/1047480793 Dismissing The The Appeal & Confirming The Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, Dated. 30.11.2016 Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysuru (Ao For Short) Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidences, Probabilities & Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…vidence Act were not applicable to the Income-tax Act, but on first principles and on general law, the principles of Evidence Act can be applied to proceedings under the Income-tax Act. The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in CIT v. Hotel Meriya [2011] 332 ITR 537 (Ker.) considered the scope of a statement recorded under Section 132(4) and found that such statement recorded by the officer as well as the documents seized would come within the purview of evidence under the Income-tax Act Page 7 of 11 read with Section 3 of the Evidence Act. The necessary corollary is that such an evidence would be admissibl…

DCIT, Central Circle- I, Gurugram vs. Arun Ghai, Faridabad

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

ITA 4932/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(36)Section 139Section 153ASection 2

…nu v. DIT 49 Taxman.com 200 (Delhi HC), CIT v. Raj Kumar Arora 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad HC), Canara Housing Development Company v. DCIT 49 taxman.com 98 (Karnataka HC), Filatx India Ltd. v. CIT 229 Taxman 555 (Delhi HC) Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, 362 ITR 664 (Kerala HC). viii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in not deciding the addition of Rs.1,46,76,109/ - made by the AO on account of disallowance of exemption u/ s 10(36) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 claimed by the assessee on merits.” 3. In this case, there was a search & seizure operation on 10.…

ACIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 31/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 30 & 31/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 cuke The Asstt. Commissioner of Sh. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat Income-tax, Vs. 53, Golimar Garden, Sahkar Central Circle-2, Marg, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFBPR 0768 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 322 &…

ACIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 30/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 30 & 31/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 cuke The Asstt. Commissioner of Sh. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat Income-tax, Vs. 53, Golimar Garden, Sahkar Central Circle-2, Marg, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFBPR 0768 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 322 &…

ACIT, Jaipur vs. Ratan Kanwar Ratnawat, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 323/JPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 30 & 31/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 cuke The Asstt. Commissioner of Sh. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat Income-tax, Vs. 53, Golimar Garden, Sahkar Central Circle-2, Marg, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFBPR 0768 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 322 &…

ACIT, Jaipur vs. Ratan Kanwar Ratnawat, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 322/JPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 30 & 31/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 cuke The Asstt. Commissioner of Sh. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat Income-tax, Vs. 53, Golimar Garden, Sahkar Central Circle-2, Marg, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFBPR 0768 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 322 &…

Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for Assessment

ITA 218/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80I

…them suitable for his own purpose. The Hon'ble Tribunals and the courts in the cases of Anil Kumar Bhatia 211 Taxman 453 (Delhi), Filatex Ltd. (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 465 (Delhi), Sunny Jacob Jewellers& Wedding Centre 362 ITR 664(Kerala) and Hotel Mariya (2011)332 ITR 537 (Kerala) are in agreement that according to the provisions of Section 153A, the A.O. is obliged to issue notice u/s 153A in respect of 6 Assessment Years preceding the year in which search has been initiated. Thereafter, he has to assess or reassess the total income of these six years as provided u/s 153A (1)(b). It was furtherclarified that only…

The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Backbone Projects Ltd., Ahmedabad

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

ITA 341/RJT/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…them suitable for his own purpose. The Hon'ble Tribunals and the courts in the cases of Anil kumar Bhatia 211 Taxman 453 (Delhi), Filatex Ltd. (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 465 (Delhi), Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre 362 ITR 664(Kerala) and Hotel Mariya (2011)332 ITR 537 (Kerala) are in agreement that according to the provisions of Section 153A, the A.O. is obliged to issue notice u/s 153A in respect of 6 Assessment Years preceding the year in which search has been initiated. Thereafter, he has to assess or reassess the total income of these six years as provided u/s 153A (1)(b).. It was further clarified that on…

The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Backbone Projects Ltd., Ahmedabad

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

ITA 340/RJT/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…them suitable for his own purpose. The Hon'ble Tribunals and the courts in the cases of Anil kumar Bhatia 211 Taxman 453 (Delhi), Filatex Ltd. (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 465 (Delhi), Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre 362 ITR 664(Kerala) and Hotel Mariya (2011)332 ITR 537 (Kerala) are in agreement that according to the provisions of Section 153A, the A.O. is obliged to issue notice u/s 153A in respect of 6 Assessment Years preceding the year in which search has been initiated. Thereafter, he has to assess or reassess the total income of these six years as provided u/s 153A (1)(b).. It was further clarified that on…

M/S Backbone Projects Limited., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

ITA 288/RJT/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…them suitable for his own purpose. The Hon'ble Tribunals and the courts in the cases of Anil kumar Bhatia 211 Taxman 453 (Delhi), Filatex Ltd. (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 465 (Delhi), Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre 362 ITR 664(Kerala) and Hotel Mariya (2011)332 ITR 537 (Kerala) are in agreement that according to the provisions of Section 153A, the A.O. is obliged to issue notice u/s 153A in respect of 6 Assessment Years preceding the year in which search has been initiated. Thereafter, he has to assess or reassess the total income of these six years as provided u/s 153A (1)(b).. It was further clarified that on…

M/S Backbone Projects Limited., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

ITA 287/RJT/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…them suitable for his own purpose. The Hon'ble Tribunals and the courts in the cases of Anil kumar Bhatia 211 Taxman 453 (Delhi), Filatex Ltd. (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 465 (Delhi), Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre 362 ITR 664(Kerala) and Hotel Mariya (2011)332 ITR 537 (Kerala) are in agreement that according to the provisions of Section 153A, the A.O. is obliged to issue notice u/s 153A in respect of 6 Assessment Years preceding the year in which search has been initiated. Thereafter, he has to assess or reassess the total income of these six years as provided u/s 153A (1)(b).. It was further clarified that on…