Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 132, Section 142(1), Section 153A.

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

Q: How many judgments cite CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd.?

196 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd. (56 Taxmann.com 286), spanning 2016 to 2026.

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 367,181 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

Also reported as

375 ITR 373

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 132 Section 142(1)Section 153A Section 132(4)Section 153C

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 292cc summons under section 131 section 250(4)dumb documents section 132(4a)section 292c child loose papers satisfaction note section 131 section 292 section 29

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

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, R.R. Dist, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1463/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 1456 & 1457/HYD/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of R.R. District. Income-tax, Circle – 16(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AACCN7214Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 1463 & 1464/HYD/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner of Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd., Income-tax, Circle – 16(1), R.R. District. Hyderabad. PAN – AACCN7214Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sriram Seshadri Revenue by: Shri Y.V.…

Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, R.R.Dist vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1457/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 14A

Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, R.R.Dist vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1456/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 14A

M/S. Paramount Propbuild (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 637/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2005-06

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, 208,Sikka Mansion, LSC, New Delhi. Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-27, Vs. Paramount Probuild Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi 208, Sikka Mansion, LSC, PIN: 1100 55 Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by Ms. Shivani Si…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1391/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2005-06

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250Section 68

M/S. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…he taxpayer, by exercising specific powers granted to first appellate authority under section 250(4) of the IT Act. The ld. D/R placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising and Marketing Pvt. Ltd., 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that the AO may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion, but the CIT (A) having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter 49 ITA NO. 201(6)/JP/2017 M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. simply by allowing the appea…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. ACIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. DCIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

ITO (It)2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Pravin Ambalal Dabi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6289/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6289/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Income Tax Officer ……………. Appellant Ward–2(1)(1), Mumbai v/s Shri Pravin Ambalal Debi Gokul Vihar, C–Wing 3rd Floor, Thakur Complex ……………. Respondent Kandivali (East), Mumbai 400 101 PAN – AITPD5425H Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing – 04.04.2022 Date of Order – 06/05/2022 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging…

ACIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. Dr. Shiv Gautam, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 85/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 85/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2017-18 A.C.I.T., Cuke Dr. Shiv Gautam, Central Circle-1, Vs. 1, Gokul, Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abopg 4893 N Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 16/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/03/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 4, Jaipur Dated 28/05/2021 For The A.Y. 2017-18 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 153B(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.17.30 Lakhs Inspite Of The Fact That The Assessee Has Made Surrender Of This Amount In His Statement Recorded As Per Law & Had Attributed It To Hitherto Undisclosed Receipts. 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 1,77,34,000/-

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 250Section 250(4)

…r powers available to her within the meaning of provisions of Section 250(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this connection, reliance is placed upon order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Jansampark Advertising and Marketing private Limited, 375 ITR 373 Delhi, wherein it has been held at para 42 as follows. “The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(A), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made.” 3. Whether on the…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax - 33 (1), Mumbai vs. Cnp Cotton, Mumbai

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

ITA 6477/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-33(1), M//S Cnp Cotton, Room No. 711, C-12, Pratyakshkar B/50, Cotton Exchange, Near Bhavan, B.K.C., Bandra, Cotton Green Railway Station, Vs. Mumbai-400051. Cotton Green (East), Mumbai-400033. Pan No. Aaifc 5376 P Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Sunil A. Umap, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Mr. Ankur Shah, Ar Date Of Hearing : 31/01/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Ankur Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil A. Umap, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…sessment orders or powers of independent enquiry under sub-section (4) of section 250. That is a consequence which cannot at all be countenanced.” 5.3 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Jansampark Advertising and Marketing Private Limited reported in 375 ITR 373 (Delhi) has observed that CIT(A) is also required to carry out inquiries whenever required and not accept the submission of the assessee as such. The relevant finding of Hon’ble Delhi High Court (supra) is reproduced as under: “35. Assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act are not a game of hide and seek. The inquiry in the wake of a notice…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mount Echo Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1397/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aakash Deep Jain & Shri N.K. Billaiyaita No. 1397/Del/2016 [A.Y 2006-07]

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1397/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2006-07] The A.C.I.T. Vs. M/s Mount Echo Buildwell Pvt Ltd Central Circle - 27 H-123, Sector - 63 New Delhi Noida, U.P. PAN: AAECM 6235 C CO No. 175/DEL/2016 [A/o ITA No. 1397/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2006-07]] M/s Mount Echo Buildwell Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T. H-123, Sector – 63 Central Circle – 27 Noida, U.P. New Delhi PAN: AAECM 6235 C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri So…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Subash Dabas, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 2399/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘G’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] The ACIT, Sh. Subash Dabas, Central Circle-18, Prop. Tirupati Construction Co. Room No.102, ARA Centre, E-2, Plot No.3, Dwarka City Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi New Delhi-110017 PAN-AAGPD6947F Revenue Assessee CO No.222/DEL/2016 (Arising out of ITA No.2399/DEL/2016) [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Sh. Subash Dabas, The ACIT, Prop. Tirupati Construction Co. Central Circle-18, Plot No.3, Dwa…

ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Commercial Developers Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 9227/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’ DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.As. No.2503 & 4435/DEL/2013 Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2010-11 DCIT, v. DLF Commercial Developers Central Circle-10(1), Ltd., New Delhi. 9th Floor, DLF Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AABCD4619C (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.168/DEL/2016 Assessment Year 2011-12 DCIT, v. DLF Commercial Developers Circle-7(1), Ltd., New Delhi. 9th Floor, DLF Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AABCD4619C (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.9227/DEL/2019 Assessme…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ne Television Network Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3311/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Senior DR

Section 250(4)

…quiry by the Assessing Officer (the AO) but without making enquiry or directing further enquiry u/s 250(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs Jansampark Advertising and Marketing (P) Limited (2015) 375 ITR 373? 2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting addition of Rs.2,24,00,000/- on account of unexplained trade receivable in his one line order by solely relying on self- serving claim of the assessee and without recording reasons for reaching the conclusion? 3. Whether on facts and in circumst…

Mahendra H. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO - Ward- 4 (1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 6892/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Bleshri Mahendra H. Shah V. Income Tax Officer – 4(1)(3) 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan C/O. The Presscopper Industries M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 175, Kika Street Mumbai – 400004 Pan: Aafps0929R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Smita Verma

Section 132(4)Section 133(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Mahendra H. Shah v. Income Tax Officer – 4(1)(3) 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan C/o. The Presscopper Industries M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 175, Kika Street Mumbai – 400004 PAN: AAFPS0929R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Vimal Punmiya Department by : Smita Verma Date of hearing : 29.07.2021 Date of pronouncement : 27.09.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Mumbai [hereinafter…

The DCIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. M/S. Vallabh Pesticides Ltd., Anand

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1503/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, A.R

Section 131Section 69A

…n law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer in a superficial manner, without conducting necessary inquiries and examination of facts, as explained by the Hon'ble High Court in Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd. 375 ITR 373 (Delhi), regarding the obligation of the CIT(A) to conduct proper inquiry. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, modify, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of, or before, the hearing of appeal. Relief claimed in appeal It is prayed that the order of the CIT (Appeals) be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 2. Fa…

Virendra Pratap, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 61(3), New Delhi

ITA 3486/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ranu Mukharji, Senior DR

Section 133Section 40Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3486/Del./2018 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Shri Virendra Pratap, vs. ITO, Ward 61 (3), 155, Teliwara Road, New Delhi. Sadar Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AFVPP5006P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ved Jain, CA REVENUE BY : Ms. Ranu Mukharji, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 09.02.2021 Date of Order : 23.04.2021 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, Shri Virendra Pratap (hereinafter referred to as ‘the assessee’) by filing…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S S.S. Con-Build Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1986/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2007-08 Acit, S.S.Con-Build Pvt.Ltd., Central Circle-14, Vs Flat No.4, R.R. Apartment, Room No.354, 3-4, Mangolpuri, Mehrauli, E-2, Ara Centre, New Delhi-110030. Jhandewalan Extn., Pan-Aajcs7477F New Delhi. Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. B.K.Dhingra, Adv. Date Of Hearing 31.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2021

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 68

…. The CIT(A), being a fact finding authority, has erred in facts and in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee without independently verifying the facts of the case, as mandated by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Jansampark Advertising (375 ITR 373).” 2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that a search operation was carried out on 20.10.2008. Subsequently, notice u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was issued on 13.11.2009 calling upon the assessee to file return of income. In response thereto, the assessee filed its return of income on 29.12.2009 declaring income o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hermes India Retails & Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 4315/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

…nt of Rule 46A of the Rules. The learned DR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Manish Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. reported in 245 CTR 397 and Jansampark Advertising and Marketing Private 4 ITA No.4315/Del./2014 Limited reported in 375 ITR 373 and submitted that after admission of the additional evidences, those evidences should have been referred to the Assessing Officer/TPO for his comments on merit. 4.1 On the contrary, the Learned Counsel of the assessee relied on the finding of the Learned CIT(A) and submitted that before admitting, the Ld. CIT(A) had sent the additional evidences…