What is CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

If revenue relies on entries of receipts in seized material, the corresponding expenditure must also be considered unless there is concrete evidence to disregard it. If documents found during a search are considered true and belong to the assessee, entries of expenditure recorded therein are also to be believed.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd.?

114 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. (349 ITR 85), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 292C, Section 69C, Section 37(1), Section 143(3).

CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. (349 ITR 85)

DCIT Central Circle - 6(1), Mumbai vs. Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Private Limited, Thane

ITA 3110/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi , AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr . Kishor Dhule, CIT DR

Section 143Section 69

…le Bombay High Court in case of Golani Bros Page | 71 ITA No. 3110 & 2547/Mum/2023 GNP Consultancy and Solutions Private Limited; A.Y. 21-22 Page 71 of 108 (2017) 85 taxmann.com 355 (Bom). Similar view has also been taken by the honourable Delhi High Court in 349 ITR 85. Accordingly in paragraph number 15.13 after discussing the plethora of judicial precedents the learned CIT – A held that since the entire receipts found as a business receipt under section 28 of the act has been considered, deduction of expenditure must be granted to the assessee and net income is to be estimated. Therefore, separate addition in…

Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Pvt Ltd, Nariman Point vs. DCIT Circle-6(1), Mumbai, Nariman Point

ITA 2547/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Gnp Consultancy & Dcit Solutions Private Limited Central Circle-6(1) Room No.1905, 19 Th Floor, Plot No.91, Shop No.1 Channel Classic Chs Sector Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Point 4 Kopar Khairne, Thane Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 709 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadcg3716B Gnp Consultancy & Dcit Solutions Private Limited Central Circle-6(1) Plot No.91, Shop No.1 Room No.1905, 19 Th Floor, Channel Classic Chs Sector Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Point 4 Kopar Khairne, Thane Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 709 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR

Section 143Section 69

…e honourable Bombay High Court in case of Golani Bros Page 70 of 108 ITA No. 3110 & 2547/Mum/2023 GNP Consultancy and Solutions Private Limited; A.Y. 21-22 (2017) 85 taxmann.com 355 (Bom). Similar view has also been taken by the honourable Delhi High Court in 349 ITR 85. Accordingly in paragraph number 15.13 after discussing the plethora of judicial precedents the learned CIT – A held that since the entire receipts found as a business receipt under section 28 of the act has been considered, deduction of expenditure must be granted to the assessee and net income is to be estimated. Therefore, separate addition in…

Shri Hitesh Himmatlal Savani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2)(3), Surat

In the result, the ground No

ITA 347/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Shri Hitesh Himmatlal Savani, I.T.O. 20-21, Keshav Park Society, Ved Ward-3(2)(3), Vs. Road, Surat-395008. Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Pan No. Bijps 5821 H Gate, Surat. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…of 50% share of Shri Hitesh Himmatbhai Savani can not therefore be accepted. The contents of the impounded documents do not lead to the conclusion that Shri Hitesh Savani had 50% share. It is therefore, respectfully submitted that CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt Ltd 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) is distinguishable and there is no inconsistent approach in view of the contents of the impounded documents not leading to the conclusion that Shri Hitesh Himmatbhai Savani had 50% share. The confirmation of Shri Hitesh Himmatbhai Savani has not been filed by the applicant. In his statement u/s. 131 of the Act recorded on 11.03.2015, Shri…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…s not open to the assessing authorities to pick and choose some of the part of the records before them 6 which were more favorable to them. Similar reliance is placed in the decision of Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Indeo Airways P Ltd 349 ITR 85 (Del). The Ld CIT(A) based on the finding given by the settlement commission for AY 2008-09 to AY 2014-15, order U/S 245D(4) dt: 27.11.2015 (Relevant para 15 at internal page 21) and finding in para 27 at page 27 therein determined the expenditure to the extent of 78% as application of income for charitable purposes and the balance amount of 22% i…

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, C.Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 401/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Harit

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133A

…it and consider only that part of the seized document which is favourable to it while framing the assessment. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the ld.AR at the time of hearing on the following decisions:- i) CIT v/s Indeo Airways (P.) Ltd, 349 ITR 85 (Delhi High Court); ii) CIT vs Damac Holdings (P.) Ltd. 401 ITR 495 (Kerala High Court); iii) C.Chander Mohan Mehta v/s ACIT, 71 ITD 245 (Pune Tribunal); iv) DCIT v/s Kanakia Hospitality (P.) Ltd. 179 ITD 1 (Mum.) (Trib.). 18 M/s. Argent Construction 20. Hence, certainly deduction towards unaccounted expenses reflected in the very same seized do…

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 4(1), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 400/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 153C

…it and consider only that part of the seized document which is favourable to it while framing the assessment. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the ld. AR at the time of hearing on the following decisions:- A] CIT vs Indeo Airways (P.) Ltd – 349 ITR 85 (Delhi High Court) B] CIT vs Damac Holdings (P.) Ltd – 401 ITR 495 (Kerala High Court) C] Chander Mohan Mehta vs ACIT – 71 ITD 245 (Pune Tribunal) D] DCIT vs Kanakia Hospitality (P.) Ltd – 179 ITD 1 (Mum Tribunal) 3.12. Hence, certainly deduction towards unaccounted expenses reflected in the very same seized documents need to be granted. M/s. Arg…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Mars Realtors P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7180/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 68

…e CIT(A), thus, held that the Assessing Officer cannot accept one part of the seized material and ignore the other part of the same material. He relied on the decisions in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); T.S. Kumaraswamy 65 ITD 188 (Mad); Vatika Greenfield Ltd. 121 TTJ 208 and held that Assessing Officer cannot accept the impounded material on selective basis and consider some part of evidence as true while rejecting the evidence which is in favour of assessee, without bringing anything on record. 19. With respect to conclusion of the Ass…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7179/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 68

…e CIT(A), thus, held that the Assessing Officer cannot accept one part of the seized material and ignore the other part of the same material. He relied on the decisions in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); T.S. Kumaraswamy 65 ITD 188 (Mad); Vatika Greenfield Ltd. 121 TTJ 208 and held that Assessing Officer cannot accept the impounded material on selective basis and consider some part of evidence as true while rejecting the evidence which is in favour of assessee, without bringing anything on record. 19. With respect to conclusion of the Ass…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7178/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 68

…e CIT(A), thus, held that the Assessing Officer cannot accept one part of the seized material and ignore the other part of the same material. He relied on the decisions in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); T.S. Kumaraswamy 65 ITD 188 (Mad); Vatika Greenfield Ltd. 121 TTJ 208 and held that Assessing Officer cannot accept the impounded material on selective basis and consider some part of evidence as true while rejecting the evidence which is in favour of assessee, without bringing anything on record. 19. With respect to conclusion of the Ass…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7177/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 68

…e CIT(A), thus, held that the Assessing Officer cannot accept one part of the seized material and ignore the other part of the same material. He relied on the decisions in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Del.); T.S. Kumaraswamy 65 ITD 188 (Mad); Vatika Greenfield Ltd. 121 TTJ 208 and held that Assessing Officer cannot accept the impounded material on selective basis and consider some part of evidence as true while rejecting the evidence which is in favour of assessee, without bringing anything on record. 19. With respect to conclusion of the Ass…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 795/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 796/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 794/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 793/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 678/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 677/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 676/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 675/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav

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

…loan was never returned. Eventually, the said loan has become irrecoverable resulting in bad debt and, therefore, the assessee requested to allow the claim as deduction as bad debt. He relied on the High Court judgment in the case of Indo Airways Pvt. Ltd. 349 ITR 85 (Delhi) and others. Eventually, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO as per the discussion given in Para No.2.4.4. of his order. It is the decision of CIT(A) that assessee retracted the disclosure of Rs.10 lakhs originally offered during the search action and assessee did not offer the same in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. He…

Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Kota vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 726/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 726/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2008-09 cuke Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Pr.C.I.T., Vs. 320, Transport Nagar, Anantpura, Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABLPJ 8219 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri K.C. Meena (Addl.CIT) l…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1470/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

…f the assessee, entries of expenditure recorded therein are also to be believed, without asking for more evidences for such expenditure. He vehemently relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Indeo Airways private limited 349 ITR 85 (Delhi). He vehemently referred to para number 14, 16 and 17 of the decision to support his claim. xiv. With respect to the expenditure, he submitted that it is not the case of the ld AO / CIT (A) to state that such expenses are otherwise not allowable to the assessee. The only reason given is the incompleteness of the seized documents as well as…

CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd.

What is CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd.

DCIT Central Circle - 6(1), Mumbai vs. Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Private Limited, Thane

Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Pvt Ltd, Nariman Point vs. DCIT Circle-6(1), Mumbai, Nariman Point

Shri Hitesh Himmatlal Savani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2)(3), Surat

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, C.Circle-4(1), Mumbai

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 4(1), Mumbai

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Mars Realtors P. Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Dev Land and Housing P.Ltd, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Devendra P. Shah, Pune

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

Devendra P. Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Ommissioner of Income-Tax

Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Kota vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi