CIT v. K. Ravindranathan Nair

265 ITR 217High Court2004#9632 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 131Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 153

Issues it is cited on

admission of additional evidenceaddition u/s 68rule 46ashare application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 133(6)cross objectionsection 68section 14aunexplained cash creditreasonable causecompany

Judgments citing CIT v. K. Ravindranathan Nair

BALA FILLING STATION,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 822/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shripawan Singh& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.822/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybridhearing) Bala Filling Station Vs. The Acit, Opp. Geb Substation, Jambusar Circle - 1, Road,Jambusar - 392150, Gujarat Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagfb8418F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 194C(6)Section 250Section 40Section 68

…clear that the restrictions placed on the appellant to produce evidence do not affect the powers of AAC under sub-section (4) of section 250 of the Act. This decision has been followed by Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair, 265 ITR 217 (Ker.). The purpose of Rule 46A appears to be ensured that evidence is primarily led before the AO. In the present case, we find that the assessee had filed the PAN copy and certificate of the transporter issued for the earlier financial year. It was a mistake which was sought to be rectified by filing the certificate of the subject year before…

SURESHKUMAR MAVJIBHAI BHINGARADIA, INDIVIDUAL,BHARUCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 355/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Sureshkumar Mavjibhai Bhingaradia, Vs. The Acit, Plot No.3441/B, Near Pci Chowkdi, Circle – 2(1)(1), Gidc Estate, Bharuch - 393002 Vadodara "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acqpb6047G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Advocate Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/02/2025

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.355/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Sureshkumar Mavjibhai Bhingaradia, Vs. The ACIT, Plot No.3441/B, Near PCI Chowkdi, Circle – 2(1)(1), GIDC Estate, Bharuch - 393002 Vadodara "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ACQPB6047G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Advocate Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 10/0…

TECHMAN BUILDWELL PRIVATE LMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed with the consequences following as per the

ITA 737/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Gs Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Arta Trana Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

…cide the issue and its admission would not cause any prejudice to the Revenue, rather, it would advance the cause of justice. Reliance is placed on following decisions; Smt. Prabhavati S Shah v. CIT (1998) 231 ITR 1 (Bom), CIT v. K Ravindranthan Nair (2004) 265 ITR 217 (Ker), Dwarika Prasad v. ITO (1997) 63 ITD 1 (Pat-TM). Abhay Kumar Shroff (1997) 63 ITD 144 (Pat-TM) and Electra (Jaipur) Ltd v. IAC 26 ITD 236 (Del). 6. It comes up that the appellant is a flagship company of the Techman group of companies and has developed various residential and commercial projects in Agra, Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Mathura,…

TECHMAN BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed with the consequences following as per the

ITA 1618/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Gs Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Arta Trana Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

…cide the issue and its admission would not cause any prejudice to the Revenue, rather, it would advance the cause of justice. Reliance is placed on following decisions; Smt. Prabhavati S Shah v. CIT (1998) 231 ITR 1 (Bom), CIT v. K Ravindranthan Nair (2004) 265 ITR 217 (Ker), Dwarika Prasad v. ITO (1997) 63 ITD 1 (Pat-TM). Abhay Kumar Shroff (1997) 63 ITD 144 (Pat-TM) and Electra (Jaipur) Ltd v. IAC 26 ITD 236 (Del). 6. It comes up that the appellant is a flagship company of the Techman group of companies and has developed various residential and commercial projects in Agra, Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Mathura,…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ACME AUTO PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5648/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma[A.Y. 2008-09] & [A.Y. 2009-10]

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(b)Section 69C

…in the cases of CIT Vs. Suretech Hospital & Research Centre Ltd. 293 ITR 53 (Bom); Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner 26 ITD 79 (Asr); Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair 265 ITR 217 (Ker); and Hon’ble Delhi High in CIT Vs. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd. 332 ITR 396 (Delhi). 4.3 We have given thoughtful consideration to the material on record and we find that certainly during the assessment proceedings assessee was given opportunity, which has been mentioned in the assessment order. However, before learned CIT(A)…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ACME AUTO PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5647/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma[A.Y. 2008-09] & [A.Y. 2009-10]

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(b)Section 69C

…in the cases of CIT Vs. Suretech Hospital & Research Centre Ltd. 293 ITR 53 (Bom); Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner 26 ITD 79 (Asr); Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair 265 ITR 217 (Ker); and Hon’ble Delhi High in CIT Vs. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd. 332 ITR 396 (Delhi). 4.3 We have given thoughtful consideration to the material on record and we find that certainly during the assessment proceedings assessee was given opportunity, which has been mentioned in the assessment order. However, before learned CIT(A)…

DCIT CIRCLE 13(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NANDANBALA COMMERCIALS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesse is also dismissed

ITA 1134/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Income Tax Circle 13(2)(2) Private Limited Room No. 452, 4 Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sanjay Infraspace Limited) Aayakar Bhavan, 1401-A, Wing One Bkc, M.K. Road, Plot No. C-66, G-Block, Mumbai – 400020 Bkc, Bandra-East Mumbai -400 092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aavcs1575L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: HM Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(ii)

…lower authorities never called these documents. The ld. Counsel also referred the following judicial pronouncements for admitting the same as additional evidences: “i. Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah Vs. CIT [231 ITR 01] (Bom HC) ii. CIT Vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair [265 ITR 217] (Ker HC) iii. Smt. Mohindar Kuar Vs. Central Government And Ors [104 ITR 120] (All HC)” After hearing both the sides and the submission of the assessee these copies of documents are also admitted as additional evidences in order to decide the issue in appeal on merit. P a g e | 14 ITA No.1134/Mum/2023 CO 67/Mum/2023 DCIT 13(2)(2) Vs. Nandanbala…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2455/MUM/2023[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…vidence before the learned assessing officer as mentioned in paragraph number 5.2 of the order. Therefore such additional evidences were admitted following the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 231 ITR 01, honourable Kerala High Court in 265 ITR 217, and honourable Allahabad High Court in 104 ITR 120. Further, the addition was also deleted, as the amount of loan was not received during the year but in assessment year 2014 – 15. 036. On hearing the parties we find that the learned CIT – A is within his powers to admit the additional evidences for which the learned CIT – A has recorded the rea…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1136/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…vidence before the learned assessing officer as mentioned in paragraph number 5.2 of the order. Therefore such additional evidences were admitted following the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 231 ITR 01, honourable Kerala High Court in 265 ITR 217, and honourable Allahabad High Court in 104 ITR 120. Further, the addition was also deleted, as the amount of loan was not received during the year but in assessment year 2014 – 15. 036. On hearing the parties we find that the learned CIT – A is within his powers to admit the additional evidences for which the learned CIT – A has recorded the rea…

ACIT (CENTRAL) , UJJAIN, UJJAIN vs. M/S GLOBUS HOUSING PVT. LTD., BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 615/IND/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central) M/S. Globus Housing Pvt. Ltd. 176, Zone-Ii, First Floor, M.P. Ujjain Vs. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Aaecg 0623 J Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Yash Kukreja, Ars Date Of Hearing 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2023

Section 68

…ice. Reliance is placed on following case laws: Shahrukh Khan vs DCIT 13 SOT 61 (Mum) ITO vs Dwarka Prasad 63 ITD I(TM)(Patna) Rachhpal Singh vs ITO 94 ITD 79 (Asr) Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. us Inspecting Asstt. CIT 26 ITD 236(Del) CIT vs K Ravindranathan Nair 265 ITR 217(Ker) Prabhavati S. Shah vs CIT 231 ITR (Bom) Manish Buildwell (Delhi High Court; order dated 20.11.2011 8.10 It is observed that all these amounts pertain to advances received from the customers in respect of flat/ house booked. These were not in the nature of unsecured loans. All these advances have been received by cheque and through banking c…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. PREM ANAND, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3514/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…Reliance is placed on following case laws: Shahrukh Khan vs DCIT 13 SOT 61(Mum) ITO vs Dwarka Prasad 63 ITD l(TM)(Patna) Rachhpal Singh vs ITO 94 ITD 79 (Asr) Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. vs Inspecting Asstt. CIT 26 ITD 236(Del) CIT vs K Ravindranathan Nair 265 ITR 217(Ker) Prabhavati S. Shah vs CIT 231 ITR l(Bom) Manish Buildwell (Delhi High Court; order dated 20.11.2011) 3.5 After admission of the additional evidence; the AO, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Manish Buildwell (supra), vide this office letter dated 09.10.2013, was directed to carry out the enquiry/inve…

CIT v. K. Ravindranathan Nair (265 ITR 217) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax