CIT v. Motor General Finance Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Central Warehousing Corp., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Central Warehousing Corp., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Central Warehousing Corp., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

M/S. Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

…tailed list of assets. It only refers to an enclosure filed along with the Tax Audit Report, which to my mind is inadequate. Once the assessee has not availed of this opportunity, it does not deserve any sympathy. In CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 449, the Delhi High Court has held that the failure of the assessee to produce documents during the course of hearing can lead to an adverse inference to the effect that if produced they would have gone against assessee in terms of section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This case had gone to the Supreme Court wherein the Apex Court returned the case…

Indo Office Solutions (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

…ment framed is bad in law. In this regard, the Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362. The Ld. AR further relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Motor General Finance Ltd. 254 ITR 449 (Del.) ii) Kuber Tobacco Products vs. DCIT 117 ITD 273 (SB) iii) CIT vs. Jai Shiv Shankar Traders 383 ITR 448 (Del) iv) Alpine Electronics vs. DGIT 341 ITR 247 v) ITO vs. Gravity Systems Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5626/Del/2012) order dated 16.03.2017 Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessment order framed is bad in law. 6. As regards to Groun…

Shri Lokesh Chand Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…rs. As far as income arising out of fluctuation rate of foreign exchange, the appellant did not cooperated with the AO during the assessment proceeding as per the direction of the Hon’ble ITAT. (As held in the case of CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 449 (Delhi), adverse inferences can be drawn when satisfactory explanation and documentary evidences are Although, the penalty provision u/s 271(1)(c) are not automatic and a must in every case of addition, this particu7lar case falls outside such general proposition.” 4. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the relevant findings given i…