CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.

418 ITR 315Supreme Court of India2019#179 most cited

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.

408

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. · 418 ITR 315 · Supreme Court · Section 132(4) statement · Section 133(6) notice · uncorroborated evidence · sufficiency of evidence · income tax additions · burden of proof · natural justice · bogus purchases

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 147Section 69BSection 148

Issues it is cited on

third party informationsection 65b(4)section 65bsection 10(26)section 65section 61section 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 69bon-moneystatement under section 132(4)protective assessment

Judgments citing CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukut Behari Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 152/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 164 & 165/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12 cuke The Assistant Commissioner of Shri Ramesh Kumar Mantri Income-tax, Vs. 211, Laxmi Complex, M.I. Central Circle-4, Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACTPM 0737 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 15 & 16/JP/2020 (Arising…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 678/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 677/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 676/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 675/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 674/CHNY/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

Dr.Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru, Chennai vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 673/CHNY/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…51 2015-16 98.48 58.16 56.21 2016-17 88.73 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…

DCIT, Circle-4, Jaipur vs. M/S Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 122/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 cuke Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing DCIT, Company, Vs. Central Circle-3, Jaipur. F-381, 382, Road No. 9F, VKI Area, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCK 0316 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 244/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessme…

Prashant Madhusudan Mahagaokar, Thane vs. DCIT CC 2, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Appellant for Assessment Year

ITA 1243/MUM/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…t as well as remand proceedings. The Learned Authorised Representative for the Appellant placed reliance on the following judgments/decisions and contended that the additions made by the Assessing Officer should be deleted: - CIT vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. 418 ITR 315 (SC) - Pr. CIT vs. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 1940 of 2017, decided on January 29, 2020] - CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P) Ltd. 372 ITR 619(Bom) 20. We have considered the rival submission and perused the material on record including the remand reports dated 29.08.2018 and 25.05.2016. The Appellant had contended before the…

Shri A. Imitiaz, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 2 (2), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.203/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Gulam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020. No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan:Bacpg6476P] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.204/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Fakhrudeen, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aaxpf5259M] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.205/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Smt. Halima, W/O Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aacph1491G] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.206/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aadpi4938E] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yeswanthram, CJ, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 132Section 271FSection 50CSection 54

…al Excise, Kolkata – II (Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006). He has further submitted that the addition made was solely based on third party information and relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315. Ignoring the 50C value, the Assessing Officer adopted the value of the property at ₹.3,53,21,100/- is against the law. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper b…

Smt. Halima, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw -2 (2), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 205/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.203/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Gulam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020. No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan:Bacpg6476P] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.204/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Fakhrudeen, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aaxpf5259M] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.205/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Smt. Halima, W/O Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aacph1491G] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.206/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aadpi4938E] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yeswanthram, CJ, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 132Section 271FSection 50CSection 54

…al Excise, Kolkata – II (Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006). He has further submitted that the addition made was solely based on third party information and relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315. Ignoring the 50C value, the Assessing Officer adopted the value of the property at ₹.3,53,21,100/- is against the law. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper b…

Shri Fakhrudeen, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 2 (2), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 204/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.203/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Gulam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020. No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan:Bacpg6476P] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.204/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Fakhrudeen, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aaxpf5259M] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.205/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Smt. Halima, W/O Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aacph1491G] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.206/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aadpi4938E] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yeswanthram, CJ, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 132Section 271FSection 50CSection 54

…al Excise, Kolkata – II (Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006). He has further submitted that the addition made was solely based on third party information and relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315. Ignoring the 50C value, the Assessing Officer adopted the value of the property at ₹.3,53,21,100/- is against the law. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper b…

Shri I. Gulam, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 2(2), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 203/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.203/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Gulam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020. No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan:Bacpg6476P] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.204/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri I. Fakhrudeen, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aaxpf5259M] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.205/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Smt. Halima, W/O Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aacph1491G] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.206/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri A. Imitiaz, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 231, K.K. Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai 625 020 No. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, [Pan: Aadpi4938E] Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yeswanthram, CJ, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 132Section 271FSection 50CSection 54

…al Excise, Kolkata – II (Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006). He has further submitted that the addition made was solely based on third party information and relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315. Ignoring the 50C value, the Assessing Officer adopted the value of the property at ₹.3,53,21,100/- is against the law. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper b…

M/S. Paras Plastic Processors, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-27(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5593/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Paras Plastic Processors, Income Tax Officer 806/807, Ajit Nath, Ward-27(2)(5), Nilkantha Enclave, Ajit Nagar, Vs. Vashi, Opp. Shreyash Cinema, Navi Mumbai-400-703. Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aaefp 8206 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Nair, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…29 16.5 The Ld. counsel Ld. counsel also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Odeon builders Private CIT Vs Odeon builders Private Limited reported in 418 ITR 315(SC) Limited reported in 418 ITR 315(SC) where the Hon’ble Cou the Hon’ble Court dismissed the Revenue Revenue’s review petition on merit by observing that review petition on merit by observing that the disallowance was based solely on third the disallowance was based solely on third-party information, which party information, which was not subjec…

ACIT Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 833/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7907/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Chemicon Engineering बिधम/ Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Room No.607, Aayakar Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 833/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) बिधम/ Chemicon Engineering Room No.607, Aayakar Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc2686H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri H. N. Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-08, Mumbai Dated 29.11.2019 For The A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Both The Parties Are As Follows: Assessee Grounds: - 1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 (The “Act”) & A.Ys.2013-14 Chemicon Engineering That By The Cit(A) U/S 250 Of The Act So Far It Relates To In Confirming Of The Additions To The Extent Of A) Rs. 6,22,05,000/- Received From Certain Companies Out Of Total Rs. 13,13,50,000/- In Respect Of Shares Allotted Against Share Application Money;

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ose statements are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity.” We may also gainfully refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court 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. 22. It was also brought to our notice that, when this commission report was confronted to the D…

Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 3 (1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7907/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7907/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Chemicon Engineering बिधम/ Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Room No.607, Aayakar Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 833/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) बिधम/ Chemicon Engineering Room No.607, Aayakar Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc2686H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri H. N. Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-08, Mumbai Dated 29.11.2019 For The A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Both The Parties Are As Follows: Assessee Grounds: - 1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 (The “Act”) & A.Ys.2013-14 Chemicon Engineering That By The Cit(A) U/S 250 Of The Act So Far It Relates To In Confirming Of The Additions To The Extent Of A) Rs. 6,22,05,000/- Received From Certain Companies Out Of Total Rs. 13,13,50,000/- In Respect Of Shares Allotted Against Share Application Money;

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ose statements are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity.” We may also gainfully refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court 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. 22. It was also brought to our notice that, when this commission report was confronted to the D…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Asansol Kolkata vs. Rajesh Jhunjhunwala

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/26/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there is no material quoted against the assessee and…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata vs. Shri Mahendra Kumar Periwal

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/136/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there is no material quoted against the assessee and…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Siliguri vs. Sri Satya Narayan Saria

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/168/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there is no material quoted against the assessee and…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata vs. Jemish Shah

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/57/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there is no material quoted against the assessee and…