CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd.

56 Taxmann.com 286High Court2015#478 most cited

What is CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has an independent statutory obligation to conduct proper inquiries and verify facts, especially when the Assessing Officer has failed to do so. The CIT(A) must ensure effective inquiry is carried out before deleting additions or accepting additional evidence.

196

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. Jansampark Advertising · Jansampark Advertising · 375 ITR 373 · CIT(A) obligation to inquire · independent verification of facts · section 250(4) · Rule 46A · additional evidence · deleting additions · unexplained investments · cash credits · duty of appellate authority

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd.

Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt. Ltd, Panaji vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Margao

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 132/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Jan 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2006-2007 M/S Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd. Salgaonkar Bhava, Altino, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aabcs8862N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/01/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Impugns The Order Dt. 20/03/2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals-2), Panaji [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Dealt With Order Dt. 20/12/2011 Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2006-07.[‘Ay’]

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Years: 2006-2007 M/s Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd. Salgaonkar Bhava, Altino, Panaji, Goa-403001. PAN: AABCS8862N . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee by: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 20/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 29/01/2026 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; This assessee’s appeal…

Moxa Diamond Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5169/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Prabhash Shankarito – 5(2)(1) Vs. Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 72/B-12, Tikam House, Road, New Marine Lines, Jss Road, Opera House, Mumbai – 400020 Girgaon S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 5(2)(1) 72/B-12, Tikam House, Jss Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Opera House, Girgaon Road, New Marine S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Lines, Mumbai – 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Kumar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 26.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…his power is conterminous with that of ITO and he can do what ITO can do and also direct in to do what he has failed to do". 4.2.1 Similarly, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also 5 Moxa Diamond Pvt ltd, Mumbai. forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions properly, obligation to conduct proper inquiry on facts would naturally shift to door of said appellate authorities and th…

ITO 5(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Mokxa Diamond Private Limited, Surat

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

ITA 2208/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Prabhash Shankarito – 5(2)(1) Vs. Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 72/B-12, Tikam House, Road, New Marine Lines, Jss Road, Opera House, Mumbai – 400020 Girgaon S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Moxa Diamond Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 5(2)(1) 72/B-12, Tikam House, Jss Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Opera House, Girgaon Road, New Marine S.O, Mumbai – 400004. Lines, Mumbai – 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aagcm1959H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Kumar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 26.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…his power is conterminous with that of ITO and he can do what ITO can do and also direct in to do what he has failed to do". 4.2.1 Similarly, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgment in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has opined that-Two appellate authorities, viz., Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal, are also 5 Moxa Diamond Pvt ltd, Mumbai. forums for fact-finding, in event of Assessing Officer failing to discharge his functions properly, obligation to conduct proper inquiry on facts would naturally shift to door of said appellate authorities and th…

Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Lalbahadur Credit Souhard Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Belgaum

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 277/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 277/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Lalbhahdur Credit Souharda Sahakari Sangh Niyamit 2471, Lalbahadur Akkamahadevi Chowk, At Post: Shirguppi Tal.:Athani Dist.:Belgaum. Pan : Aagas8466F . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-(521)(1), Karwar. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Jaykumar Patil [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 05/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1073446535(1) Dt. 19/02/2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 26/09/2022 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereafter] For Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’ Hereafter].

For Appellant: Mr Jaykumar Patil [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 277/PAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Lalbhahdur Credit Souharda Sahakari Sangh Niyamit 2471, Lalbahadur Akkamahadevi Chowk, At Post: Shirguppi Tal.:Athani Dist.:Belgaum. PAN : AAGAS8466F . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer Ward-(521)(1), Karwar. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Mr Jaykumar Patil [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 05/01/2026 D…