CIT v. McMillan & Co.

33 ITR 182Supreme Court of India1958#629 most cited

What is CIT v. McMillan & Co. authority for?

The Income Tax Officer (ITO), even when accepting the assessee's method of accounting, is not bound by the profit figures shown in the accounts and can still determine the correct profits.

156

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. McMillan & Co. · McMillan & Co. 33 ITR 182 · Section 145 · Section 145(3) · method of accounting · AO not bound by profit figures · assessment of business profits · income tax officer powers · accepted accounting method · profit computation

Sections most often in play

Section 43BSection 115JBSection 147Section 14ASection 153ASection 37Section 143(3)Section 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 3asection 31(3)section 120(4)(b)section 4asection 36(1)(v)section 10(20)section 145(1)section 61section 80hhc(3)section 46section 40a(7)section 115ja

Judgments citing CIT v. McMillan & Co.

ITO-33(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Vikram Baijnath Agarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed and cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 103/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 33(1)(2) V. Shri Vikrambaijnath Agarwal Room No. 945, 9Th Floor 2003/04, Birchwood Raheja Villows Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex Lokhandwala Township Nr Mahindra Gate 4 Kandivali (E), Mumbai - 400101 Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400051 Pan: Adepa8582C Appellant Respondent

Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…n as regularly followed The choice of the method of accounting lies with the assessee; but the assessee must show 12 C.O. No. 11/MUM/2022 Shri VikramBaijnath Agarwal that he has followed the method regularly for his own purposes- CIT v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC). A taxpayer is free to employ, for the purpose of his trade, his own method of keeping accounts, and for that purpose to value his stock-in-trade either at cost or market price. A method of accounting adopted by the trader consistently and regularly cannot be discarded by the departmental authorities on the view that he should have adopted a…

Srinath Reddy Nalla, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1233/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Srinath Reddy Nalla, Vs. Income Tax Officer, R/O.Hyderabad. Ward – 6(2), Pan : Aagpn8178E. Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya Date Of Hearing: 17/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18/10/2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) – 6, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2013-14. Ita 1233/Hyd/2019

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 50

…that there are valid grounds in existence warranting rejection of books of account and estimation of income. In this regard, reliance is placed on the following judicial precedents: 1. Kachwala Gems Vs JCIT [20071288 ITR 10(SC): 2. CIT Vs. McMillan & Co[1958]33 ITR 182(SC) : 3. Bastiram Narayan Das Vs CIT 119941 210 ITR 438 (Bom): 4. Awadesh Pratap Sing Abdul Rahman & Bros. Vs CIT [1994] 76 Taxman106 [All) 5. Champalal Chowdary Vs DCIT [2012154 SOT 398(Jaipur —Trib). 6. CIT Vs Bhawan & Path Nirman (Bohra & Co) [2002]258 ITR 676 (Raj). 7. CIT Vs K. Y. Pillaiah & Sons (19671 63 ITR 411(SC). 7.27 The facts and ci…

DCIT, Circle-25(2), New Delhi vs. Transnational Drilling & Mining Associates P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 844/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Dcit, Vs Transnational Drilling & Mining Circle-25(2), Associates P.Ltd., Luv-303, New Delhi. Agarsen Awas, 66-I.P.Extention, Patparganj, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aadct1249C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Brij Mohan Barwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 05.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 08.07.2022

Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14] DCIT, vs Transnational Drilling & Mining Circle-25(2), Associates P.Ltd., LUV-303, New Delhi. Agarsen Awas, 66-I.P.Extention, Patparganj, New Delhi-110092. PAN-AADCT1249C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR Respondent by Shri Brij Mohan Barwal, CA Date of Hearing 05.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 08.07.2022 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM : This appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-9, Ne…

Asstt. CIT-32(1), Mumbai vs. Sunitaben Shantilal Patel, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed in terms of aforesaid findings

ITA 111/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalasst. Commissioner Of Income Tax-32(1), Room No. 702, 7Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. ...... Appellant Vs. Sunitaben Shantilal Patel, 1903, Siddhivinayak Tower Chs Ltd. Link Road, Sudhendra Nagar, Dahisar (E), Mumbai-400068. Pan: Afhpp0267N ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. B.K. Bagchi, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Sh. Jigaar Mehta, Ar Date Of Hearing : 30/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.08.2020 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Rejecting The Audited Books Of Accounts & Reducing The Turnover To Rs. 9,50,35,865/- Against Turnover Of Rs. 12,05,07,568/- As Disclosed In The Audited Books Of Accounts.” 2. “Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Eliminating He Profits To 8% Of The Reduced Turnover Against Addition Of Rs. 8,49,87,993/- Made By The Ao.”

For Appellant: Sh. B.K. Bagchi, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Jigaar Mehta, AR
Section 142(1)Section 271(1)

…me on cash basis whereas at certain other instances, the same is accounted for on accrual basis. The Income Tax Act, 1961 does not permit such hybrid system of accounting as per section 145 of the Act. 19. Ld. CIT(A) relied on CIT Vs. Mc Millan and Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC), which empowers CIT appeal to reject the books of accounts of the assessee by invoking the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) worked out turnover of the assessee at Rs. 9,50,35,865/- as against the turnover of Rs. 9,30,08,560/- offered by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) worked out income of the appellant at Rs. 76,02,870/- being a s…

Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, Masuda Bijainagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Beawar

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

ITA 910/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Ms Savita Bundas (CIT)
Section 147

…ion of book results u/s 145(3) of the Act. Based on these facts and circumstances, the ld CIT(A) wanted to reject the books of accounts of the assessee and for that he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Me Millan & Co. (33 ITR 182) (SC) wherein, Hon`ble Supreme Court held that CIT(A) has power to reject the books of accounts accepted by the Assessing officer. In view of this, ld CIT(A) proceeded to estimate the commission income on the impugned purchases amounting to Rs.4,07,69,950/-. Therefore, ld CIT(A) observed that the entire carats of diamonds purchased from impugned S…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Beawar vs. Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, Masuda Bijainagar

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

ITA 819/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Ms Savita Bundas (CIT)
Section 147

…ion of book results u/s 145(3) of the Act. Based on these facts and circumstances, the ld CIT(A) wanted to reject the books of accounts of the assessee and for that he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Me Millan & Co. (33 ITR 182) (SC) wherein, Hon`ble Supreme Court held that CIT(A) has power to reject the books of accounts accepted by the Assessing officer. In view of this, ld CIT(A) proceeded to estimate the commission income on the impugned purchases amounting to Rs.4,07,69,950/-. Therefore, ld CIT(A) observed that the entire carats of diamonds purchased from impugned S…

Sri. George Mathew, Cochin vs. The ITO, Cochin

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

…issioner (Appeals) to adjudicate the appeals himself rather than remanding the same to the Assessing Officer can be faulted. 19. Learned Senior Counsel for the Revenue relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 to support his contention that when documents are produced before the First Appellate Authority, the matter should have been remanded to the Assessing Officer. In our view, this judgment does not support the proposition canvassed by the learned Senior Counsel. This judgment was rendered by the Apex 7 Shri George Mathew Court in the background of t…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. Sri. George Mathew, Cochin

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

…issioner (Appeals) to adjudicate the appeals himself rather than remanding the same to the Assessing Officer can be faulted. 19. Learned Senior Counsel for the Revenue relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 to support his contention that when documents are produced before the First Appellate Authority, the matter should have been remanded to the Assessing Officer. In our view, this judgment does not support the proposition canvassed by the learned Senior Counsel. This judgment was rendered by the Apex 7 Shri George Mathew Court in the background of t…

Melongos India Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corp Ward -4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 863/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

…not commented upon. Consequently, the view expressed in Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry’s case (supra) and Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria's case 13 (supra) still holds the feet. It may be noted that the issue was considered in CIT v. McMillan and Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC). Referring to a decision of the Bombay High Court in Narondas Manordass v. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 909 (Bom), it was held that the language used in section 31 of the old Act is wide enough to enable the first appellate authority to correct the Income Tax Officer not only with regard to a matter which has been raised by the assessed but also with re…

Vikas Oil Products, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 28/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…d, ld. AR has placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements in support of these contentions: * CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutory Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 16 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. * CIT Vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC) * ACIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Singhal [2019] 183 DTR 161 (Del.)(Trib.) After analyzing the above decisions, we found that in these judgments, it has been held that the CIT(A) has power of enhancement and the assessee cannot withdraw appeal and the CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and cannot dismiss the appeal in limine. We may point out that…

Om Industries, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur, Jiapur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 27/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…d, ld. AR has placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements in support of these contentions: * CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutory Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 16 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. * CIT Vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC) * ACIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Singhal [2019] 183 DTR 161 (Del.)(Trib.) After analyzing the above decisions, we found that in these judgments, it has been held that the CIT(A) has power of enhancement and the assessee cannot withdraw appeal and the CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and cannot dismiss the appeal in limine. We may point out that…

Jr Industries, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 26/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…d, ld. AR has placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements in support of these contentions: * CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutory Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC) 16 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. * CIT Vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC) * ACIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Singhal [2019] 183 DTR 161 (Del.)(Trib.) After analyzing the above decisions, we found that in these judgments, it has been held that the CIT(A) has power of enhancement and the assessee cannot withdraw appeal and the CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and cannot dismiss the appeal in limine. We may point out that…

Sugota Industries Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1459/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)

…er of remand to include in the assessment something which ought to have been so included by the Income-tax Officer, and a remand in that case was, therefore, proper. The matter also came before this court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC); but the question, with which we are concerned, was left open. There is, however, a passage in the judgment, approving of the observations of Chagla, C.J., in Narrondas Manordass v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1957] 31 ITR 909 to the following effect: "It is clear that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been constituted a revising autho…

ACIT, Sangrur vs. M/S Aggarsain Fibres Ltd., Samana

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

ITA 829/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…. CIT (1968) 67 ITR 582 (Cal.) • Orissa Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 923 (Ori) • S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar Vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 579 (SC) • Bharat Mills Products Vs. CIT (1981) 128 ITR 682 (All) • CIT Vs. McMillan & Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) • CIT Vs. K.Y. Pilliah and Sons [1967] 63 ITR 411 (SC) • Jhandu Mal Tara Chand Rice Mills Vs. CIT [1969] 73 ITR 192 (P&H) • R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spinning and Weaving Mills Vs. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 260 (Bom) • Bharat Mil Products Vs. CIT 81 ITR 609 (Bom) • Steelworth Ltd. Vs. CIT 69 ITR 36 (Gau) • B.N. Maheshwari Vs. CIT 210 ITR 438 (Bom) 6.9…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 6168/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 68

…airs. CIT v. Vikrarn Plastics [1999] 239 ITR 161(Guj). Thus section 45(1) cast an obligation on the AO to compute income in accordance with books of accounts maintained during the course of business. CIT v A. Krishna Swamy 53 ITR 122 (SC), CIT v Mcmelan & Co. 33 ITR 182. Suspicion, however strong it may be, is no ground for the AO for invoking the provisions of ITA No. 6168/Del/2016 & 19 CO No. 9/Del/2017 Sunil Nayyar section 145(3) of the Act", Thus the AO in any circumstances cannot ignore the books of accounts, though he can reject the same. What the AO has done that he has conveniently ignored the books of…

M/S. Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavam/S.Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Vs. Acit Ltd. Central Circle-17, B-90, Second Floor, Room No. 356, Vishwakarma Colony Ara Centre, New Delhi – 110 044 Jhandewalan Extension Pan Aadcg6909N New Delhi – 110 055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ethod of accounting employed by the assessee, real income of the assessee cannot be properly deduced there from, the income tax officer may determine the income as per his wisdom. Further, the honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Macmillan & Co (1958) 33 ITR 182 has held that the choice of the method of accounting lies with the assessee. The only precondition is that assessee must show that he has followed the method regularly for his own purposes. 25. The second issue that arises is whether the assessee is following this method regularly or not. Admittedly, this is the 1st year of the assessee. In this…

DCIT Circle 1(1), Gwalior vs. Swastik Roadlines P Ltd, Gwalior

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is treated as partly allowed for

ITA 146/AGR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra08 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 201(1)Section 40

…ion of Sec. 145(3) of the Act. But ld AO has impliedly rejected the books of accounts though failed to mention specific section i.e 145(3) of the Act but in essence he had rejected the book results. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s MC Millan & Co. 33 ITR 182 (SC)has held that CIT(A) has powers to reject the books of accounts even if not done by AO. Therefore, looking to serious defects and non-compliance on the part of the assessee to the satisfaction of AO. I hereby exercise my powers and invoke the provision of Sec. 145(3) of the Act and I.T.A No. 146/Agra/2019 7 reject the book results as declared…

DCIT, Kannur vs. M/S Manjoo & Co., Kannur

ITA 625/COCH/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…rs covered by the assessment order and correct the assessment in respect of all such matters even to the prejudice of the assessee and remand the case to the Assessing Officer to inquire into matters which were not the subject matter of appeal - vide [1958] 33 ITR 182 (Commissioner of Income-tax v. McMillan and Co.). The only restriction on the power while enhancement is that, the assessee must be given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause as against such assessment or reducing the amount of refund. Explanation appended to Section 251 is a further addition to the power given to the Commissioner as spec…

ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi vs. Agson Global Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5269/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3741, 3742, 3743, 3744, 3745 & 3746/Del/2019 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 to 2017-18) Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Assistant A-25, Nirman Vihar, New Delhi Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle-28, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 5264, 5265, 5266, 5267, 5268 & 5269/Del/2019 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 to 2017-18) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax , A-25, Nirman Vihar, New Central Circle-28, Delhi New Delhi (A…

Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 3743/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3741, 3742, 3743, 3744, 3745 & 3746/Del/2019 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 to 2017-18) Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Assistant A-25, Nirman Vihar, New Delhi Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle-28, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 5264, 5265, 5266, 5267, 5268 & 5269/Del/2019 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 to 2017-18) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax , A-25, Nirman Vihar, New Central Circle-28, Delhi New Delhi (A…