What is CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities authority for?

Additional evidence can be admitted at the appellate stage only if the court deems it necessary for pronouncing its judgment or for substantial cause, not as a matter of right for the assessee. The mere importance of evidence does not justify its admission at the appellate stage if not produced before the AO.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities?

41 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (68 ITR 708), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 139(1), Section 142(1), Section 144, Section 147, Section 148, Section 153A.

CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (68 ITR 708)

ANSHUMAN AUTO IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148

…justified in making addition Same view was taken in the case of 5 | P a g e Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1(SC) by the Hon'ble Apex Court Reliance is also placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of CIT VS Oasis Hospitalities (2011) 9 Taxmann 179 (Delhi), in which it was held "The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things. Those are: (i) identity of the creditor; (ii) their creditworthiness/investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when these three ingredients are established prima facie, the department is required to undertake further exercise." In C…

MAHESH KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

ITA 326/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Completion Of Assessment By Passing A Speaking Order.

For Appellant: Shri S.L.Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 45

…fore Appellate Authority as a matter of right. The CIT (A) is justified in refusing to entertain additional evidence sought to be produced by an assessee which they failed to produce before the AO. In the case of Velgi Deoraj and Co vs. CIT reported in [1968] 68 ITR 708 (Bombay) [13-09-1967] the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the admission of additional evidence at the appellate stage was not referable to any right of the party to produce the evidence but was dependent solely on the requirement of the court and it was for the court to decide whether for pronouncing its judgment or for any other substanti…

M/S KERALA AUTOMOBILES LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/COCH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember Kerala Automobiles Ltd. Asst. Cit, Aralumoodu P.O., Neyattinkara Circle 1(1), Vs. Trivandurm 695123 Trivandrum [Pan:Aabck0142M] (Respondent) (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Anand George Thomas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 115Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 251Section 68

…he assessee to substantiate it’s claims before him. Reference in this regard may be made to, inter alia, decisions in Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 1 (Bom); CIT v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 57 (Del);Velji Deoraj& Co. v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 708 (Bom), to cite some; the case law in the matter being legion. Even as the latter two decisions are in relation to the power of the Tribunal u/r. 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, the same is in paramateria with r. 46A(4).His order, rather than rubbishing the assessment order for a gross abuse of the power to best-judge an assessment, endorses it…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), JABALPUR vs. SHRI SANDESH KUMAR JAIN, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue‟s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 41/JAB/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur27 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCA

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 28Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…recedents, where some inherent lacunae or defect becomes apparent to the appellate court, coming in the way of pronouncing the judgment, it held, the expression „to enable it to pronounce the judgment‟ can be invoked (also see Velji Deoraj & Co. v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 708 (Bom)). We find none such, nor was any explained. We, thus, do not find these conditions as satisfied, for us to admit the additional evidence furnished by the assessee before the first appellate authority for the first time, „admitted‟ by him de hors r. 46A, or exercise our power to admit the same u/r. 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules. 5.3 We…