What is CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. authority for?

Income tax additions cannot be sustained merely on the basis of uncorroborated statements or allegations. The Revenue must bring on record sufficient material and allow the assessee to produce evidence to prove such additions.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.?

408 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418 ITR 315), spanning 2018 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153C, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 143(3), Section 69, Section 147.

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418 ITR 315)

Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo vs. Kamla Oleo Private Limited, Barotiwala

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 897/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.897/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ito M/S Kamla Oleo Private Limited बनाम/ Parwanoo, Village Buranwala, Barotiwala Vs. Himachal Pradesh-173220. Solan, Himachal Pradesh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadck-7696-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Adv.). – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Cit(A)] Dated 25-06-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 29-12-2019. The Issues That Arise In The Appeal Are – (I) Addition Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68; (Ii) Disallowance U/S 14A; (Iii) Addition Of Unexplained Credit U/S 69A. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under. The Assessee Being

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Adv.). – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68Section 69A

…ere framed on the assessee. The Ld. AO merely relied on third-party statement without affording opportunity of cross- examination of that person to the assessee. Reference was made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Odeon Builders P. Ltd (418 ITR 315) as well as in Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (281 CTR 0241) to delete the impugned addition. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4.3 From the facts, it emerges that the assessee has made sales to M/s AS International after charging CST. The sales so made by the assessee are subjected to VAT assessment. The sales are duly su…

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Ludhiana, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Waryam Steel Casting Private Limited, Kanganwal Road

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 757/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 148Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV, VP &SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 715 /Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Waryam Steel Castings Private बनाम The DCIT Limited, Circle-4, Ludhiana Kanganwal Road, Jugiana, Ludhiana, Punjab-141010 "ायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAACW1494P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 757/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 The ACIT बनाम M/s Waryam S…

Waryam Steel Castings Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 148Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV, VP &SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 715 /Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Waryam Steel Castings Private बनाम The DCIT Limited, Circle-4, Ludhiana Kanganwal Road, Jugiana, Ludhiana, Punjab-141010 "ायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAACW1494P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 757/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 The ACIT बनाम M/s Waryam S…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Faridkot, Bsnl Building vs. M/S Vohra Solvex Pvt. Ltd, Sadiq Road

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 588/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/s Vohra Solvex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-1, Faridkot Sadiq Road, Faridkot, Punjab 151203 [PAN: AABCV 6919K] (Respondent) (Appellant) C. O. No. 3/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Vohra Solvex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assessment Unit, NFAC, Delhi, Sadiq Road, Faridkot, Punjab JAO, Income Tax Officer, 151203 Ward 1, Faridkot [PAN: AABCV 6919K] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by : Sh. S…

Inderpal Singh Chhabra, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/CTK/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack08 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.450/Ctk/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Inderpal Singh Chhabra Vs Acit, Circle Rourkela Prop: Essar Enterprises Daily Market, C/O Crazy Cool, Main Rd, Po/Ps : Rourkela, Dist : Sundargarh Pan No. :Ajlpc 6337 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra & Shri Baidyanath Behera, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 04.09.2024 In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1068345718(1)), For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld Cit Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Transportation Of Coal & Trading In Coals. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Original Return Filed By The Assessee Came To Be Processed U/S.143(3) Of The Act By The Nfac & The Assessment Came To Be Completed On 10.02.2021 Accepting The Returned Income. Ld Ar Drew Our Attention To Page 3 Of The Paper Book

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra & Shri BaidyanathFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 206CSection 43B

…submission that the information having already been provided to the AO and the same have already been examined at the time of assessment proceedings, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Odeon Builders, reported in [2019] 418 ITR 315(SC), the order itself is liable to be quashed. 10. The ld AR further relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator India Ltd, reported in [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) to submit that the change of opinion cannot be used for the purpose of reopening the assessment. 11. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the AO in his noti…

DCIT., Circle 3(1), Hyderabad vs. Rohini Minerals Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 980/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.980/Hyd/2024, 1079/Hyd/2024 & 1080/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Vs. M/S Rohini Minerals Circle-3(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccr0773N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.K.Gupta, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.Ar

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.980/Hyd/2024, 1079/Hyd/2024 & 1080/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19, 2014-15 & 2015-16) DCIT Vs. M/s Rohini Minerals Circle-3(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN :AACCR0773N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri S.K.Gupta, AR रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.AR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 12/02/2024 घोर्णध क…

DCIT., Circle 3(1), Hyderabad vs. Rohini Minerals Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 1080/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.980/Hyd/2024, 1079/Hyd/2024 & 1080/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Vs. M/S Rohini Minerals Circle-3(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccr0773N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.K.Gupta, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.Ar

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.980/Hyd/2024, 1079/Hyd/2024 & 1080/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19, 2014-15 & 2015-16) DCIT Vs. M/s Rohini Minerals Circle-3(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN :AACCR0773N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri S.K.Gupta, AR रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.AR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 12/02/2024 घोर्णध क…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Priti Nilesh Jain Daga, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4616/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…ts are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity. 9. We would also like to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418 ITR 315), wherein also it was held that the addition/disallowance made solely on third party information without subjecting it to further scrutiny and denying the opportunity of cross examination of the third party renders the addition/ disallowance bad in law. 10. Finally, We would like to refer to the decision delivered in case of H.R. Mehta v/s Assist…

Priti Nilesh Jain Daga, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4507/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…ts are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity. 9. We would also like to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418 ITR 315), wherein also it was held that the addition/disallowance made solely on third party information without subjecting it to further scrutiny and denying the opportunity of cross examination of the third party renders the addition/ disallowance bad in law. 10. Finally, We would like to refer to the decision delivered in case of H.R. Mehta v/s Assist…

Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad Through L/H. Shri Dilnawaz & Mrs. Mehrunissa, Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Muzaffarnagar

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

ITA 3555/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 147Section 148

…the purchases were made u/s 133(6) of the Act and they have not replied. Moreover, the assessee was never asked to produce the directors. The ld. counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315(SC) • CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del) • Pr. CIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del) • CIT v.Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd, ITA 71/2015, ITA 72/2015, ITA 84/2015 (del) • CIT Vs M/s Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 778 of 2015 Dated 13- 10- 2015] (del) • PCIT vs. Softline Creations Pvt. Ltd (2016) 387 IT…

DCIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Pavan Kumar B Chandan, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2592/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani (Sr.DR)

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…e assessee because it has not been tested on the touchstone of cross-examination as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE reported in (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) and in the case of CIT v Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315. Therefore, nothing turns on these P a g e | 13 A.Y. 2015-16 Pavankumar Bachhraj Chandan statements of brokers. Thus, we find that no infirmity in the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.2,30,79,975/- + Rs.4,61,600/- by passing the impugned order. 8. We also note that the issue of denying exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act in r…

G.Ananthasubramaniam, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2505/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2505/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-2015) G. Ananthasubramaniam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.21/7, 2Nd Main Road, Non Corporate Ward 15(1) Kasturba Nagar, Adyar, Chennai. Chennai 600 020. [Pan: Aaapa 8460E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. P. James Victor Rajkumar, ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Mr. P. James Victor RajkumarFor Respondent: Ms. D. Komali Krishna, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.76 47.55 45.35 Based on above tabulation, it could not be accepted that the assessee would attempt to conceal income as estimated by Ld. AO. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Odeon Builders (P) Ltd (2019) 110 Taxmann.com 64 (SC) has held that no addition can be made on the basis of third-party information gathered by the Investigation Wing of the Department. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned additions are not sustainable in law and therefore, we delete the impugned additions for all the years. Though the assessee has taken g…

Manek Metal Industries, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4277/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrimanek Metal Industries V/S. Ito, W-19(2)(3), Mumbai 1, Jyoti Studio Compound, बनाम Maharashtra. Kennedy Bridge, Nana Chowk, Mumbai, Grant Road S.O, Mumbai-400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafm0609F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: S. L. JainFor Respondent: R. R. Makwana

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 37

…ourt has held that on discharge of initial onus and substantiating the purchases through bills, supporting documents, sales tax returns, etc., no disallowance can be made. 16) Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. reported at 418 ITR 315 (SC), wherein their lordships while dismissing the revenue's appeal and relying upon the order of CIT(A), held as under: "Thus, the entire disallowance in this case is based on third party information gathered by the Investigation Wing of the Department, which have not been independently subjected to further verification by the AO who has not pro…

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

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

ITA 2363/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 153DSection 69BSection 69C

…tements recorded/material relied and gathered behind the back of the assessee and without any opportunity for cross examination despite specific request made during the course of assessment proceedings, cannot be relied upon as it has no evidentiary value. i) 418 ITR 315 (SC) CIT v. Odeon Builders (P) Ltd. ii) 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC) Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) KishnichandChellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gu…

Shri Prem Industries, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Bharatpur

The appeal is disposed of, and the matter is remanded to

ITA 877/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 271ASection 69CSection 70

…e non replies of notices issued to the parties was already brought to the notice of the assessee in the show cause. However the assessee chooses to remain silence on this issue. 4.2.4. The assessee relied upon the decision in the case of Odeon Builders P Ltd 418 ITR 315 wherein it was held that the assessee discharged its initial burden by producing various documentation including purchase bills, transport bill, confirmed copy of accounts, details of payment by cheuge, VAT registration and ITR of seller and therefore additions cannot be made without providing a copy of the statements and opportunity of cross exa…

Agt Foods India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income-Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre

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

ITA 464/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 464/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 AGT Foods India Pvt. Ltd., 401-B, Filix Bldg., LBS Road, Bandup West, Mumbai PAN: AAJCA7987L (Appellant) vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Officer, National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue by : Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 13/11/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26/11/2024 PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The assessee has filed…

Suresh Kishinchand Changwani, Mumbai vs. DCIT-23(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3336/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shambhu Yadav. Sr. AR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Suresh Kishinchand Changwani, Deputy Commissioner of 407, Silver Palace Pali Mala Road, Income Tax – 23(3). Bandra West, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai 400050 (PAN : AABPC0937F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Bhupendra Shah, CA Revenue : Shri Shambhu Yadav. Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 21.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 11.11.2024 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of L…

Kamalakannan Ramesh, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-1, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1538/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148

…ement of a person can’t be used against a person/ assessee Mr. Kamalakannan Ramesh :: 8 :: without it being tested on the touch stone of cross-examination as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P) Ltd., reported in [2019] 110 Taxmann.com 64 (SC). Therefore, looking from any angle, even if the statement of Ms. G. Subhadra is considered, still the addition cannot be sustained, without it being tested by cross- examination. Hence, the impugned addition of Rs.16,47,500/- needs to be deleted and we order accordingly. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. O…

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Sarena P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1754/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri D.P. Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 143Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1753 & 1754/DEL/2022 (Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17) DCIT, Central Circle-30, vs. M/s Sarena Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 15, Harcharan Bagh, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAACS2945R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CO Nos.52 & 53/DEL/2023 (in ITA Nos.1753 & 1754/DEL/2022) (Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Sarena Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT, Central Circle 30, 15, Harcharan Bagh, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAACS2945R) (APPE…

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Sarena P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1753/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri D.P. Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 143Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1753 & 1754/DEL/2022 (Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17) DCIT, Central Circle-30, vs. M/s Sarena Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 15, Harcharan Bagh, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAACS2945R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CO Nos.52 & 53/DEL/2023 (in ITA Nos.1753 & 1754/DEL/2022) (Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Sarena Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT, Central Circle 30, 15, Harcharan Bagh, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAACS2945R) (APPE…

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.

What is CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.

Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo vs. Kamla Oleo Private Limited, Barotiwala

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Ludhiana, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Waryam Steel Casting Private Limited, Kanganwal Road

Waryam Steel Castings Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Ludhiana

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Faridkot, Bsnl Building vs. M/S Vohra Solvex Pvt. Ltd, Sadiq Road

Inderpal Singh Chhabra, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela

DCIT., Circle 3(1), Hyderabad vs. Rohini Minerals Private Limited, Hyderabad

DCIT., Circle 3(1), Hyderabad vs. Rohini Minerals Private Limited, Hyderabad

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Priti Nilesh Jain Daga, Mumbai

Priti Nilesh Jain Daga, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(4), Mumbai

Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad Through L/H. Shri Dilnawaz & Mrs. Mehrunissa, Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Muzaffarnagar

DCIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Pavan Kumar B Chandan, Mumbai

G.Ananthasubramaniam, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(1), Chennai

Manek Metal Industries, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(2)(3), Mumbai

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

Shri Prem Industries, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Bharatpur

Agt Foods India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income-Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre

Suresh Kishinchand Changwani, Mumbai vs. DCIT-23(3), Mumbai

Kamalakannan Ramesh, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-1, Chennai

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Sarena P.Ltd, New Delhi

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Sarena P.Ltd, New Delhi