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 366,470 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.

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Anupama Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 40/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Sitansu Sekhar Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 38/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Smt. Kuntala Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 50/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Parbati Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 49/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Kishore Kumar Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 48/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Mamata Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 47/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak vs. Amruta Preetam Mohapatra, Bhadrak

In the result, Appeals of the revenue in in ITANos

ITA 46/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM ITA Nos.42 & 43/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Deepansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AQHPM3912G (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.44 & 45/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-16) ITO Vs Himansu Mohapatra Kuansh, Bhadrak, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak PAN No. : AJDPM0006A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ITA Nos.38 & 39/CTK/2020 (नििाारण वषा / A…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Apeejay Shipping Ltd

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITA/26/2021HC Calcutta08 Dec 2021

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…

Mirah Dekor Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 14, Mumbai

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6809/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2021AY 2009-10
Section 133ASection 14ASection 234A

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 6809/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 6810/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2010-11) I.T.A. No. 6811/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2016-17) Vs. DCIT, CC-2(1) Mirah Dekor Pvt. Ltd. 208, Parvati Industrial Pratishtha Estate, Sunmill Compound Bhavan Lower Parel-West M.K. Road Mumbai-400 013. Mumbai 400020. PAN : AABCM4262A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri K.P. Dewani Department by Shri Tharian Oommen Date of Hearing 16.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement 12.11.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Ya…

Shri.B.H.Basha, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1375/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Roumvan Paite, CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 69Section 69A

…f the sum of Rs. 61,000, for income-tax and excess profits tax and business profits tax purposes, representing the value of the high denomination notes which were encashed.” 26. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd., 418 ITR 315 (SC) head- note is as follows:- “Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of (Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that entire disallowance was based on third party information gathered by Investigation Wing of Department, which had no…

M/S Om Steel India, Howrah vs. ITO Ward-48(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 120/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

Section 148

…Therefore, the 4 M/s Om Steel India, AY 2011-12 addition of Rs. 5,72,906/- is also directed to be deleted. For this decision of ours, we rely on the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT, New Delhi Vs. M/s. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. reported in 418 ITR 315 wherein a similar case the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “3. However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs. 19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the CIT (Appeals) allowed the appeal of t…

Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 7167/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 7167/MUM/2017 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., v. Dy. CIT – 10(2)(2) 304, Atlanta Arcade Room No. 264, 2nd Floor Marol Church Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Andheri East, Mumbai -4000059 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACM4100C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ashok Bansal Department by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of Hearing : 16.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 14.09.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appe…

Mesers Supertech Forgings(India) Pvt.Ltd., Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 563/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 147

…2/2003 – IT (INV) dated 10/3/2003 and 286/98/2013 – IT dated 18/12/2014. He further referred to the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in principal Commissioner of income tax vs. Sayumya construction private Ltd (2016) 387 ITR 529 (Gujarat). 2019] 110 Taxmann.com 64 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Commissioner of Income Tax-7, New Delhi v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd [refer Page no 176-177of case law paper book] Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of (Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that e…

Shri Gaurav Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 247/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nto by the AO. The assessee had discharged the onus initially cast upon it by providing the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO." Shri Vrindavan Tayal ITA No.242/Ind/2019 & 245-247/Ind/2019 27. In the case of Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd 110 Taxmann.com 64, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the review petition, held as under: "However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) allowed…

Shri Gopal Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 246/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nto by the AO. The assessee had discharged the onus initially cast upon it by providing the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO." Shri Vrindavan Tayal ITA No.242/Ind/2019 & 245-247/Ind/2019 27. In the case of Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd 110 Taxmann.com 64, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the review petition, held as under: "However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) allowed…

Govardhan Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 245/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nto by the AO. The assessee had discharged the onus initially cast upon it by providing the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO." Shri Vrindavan Tayal ITA No.242/Ind/2019 & 245-247/Ind/2019 27. In the case of Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd 110 Taxmann.com 64, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the review petition, held as under: "However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) allowed…

Shri Vrindavan Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 242/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nto by the AO. The assessee had discharged the onus initially cast upon it by providing the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO." Shri Vrindavan Tayal ITA No.242/Ind/2019 & 245-247/Ind/2019 27. In the case of Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd 110 Taxmann.com 64, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the review petition, held as under: "However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) allowed…

M/S Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd(Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Ltd), Delhi vs. Dy CIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai

ITA 252/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2021AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM ITA No.252/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year :2016-17) M/s. Sinnar Thermal Power Vs. Dy. CIT CC 6(4) 19th Floor, Ltd., (Formerly Rattan India Nasik Power Ltd, Air India Building A-150-151, Ground Floor Mumbai – 400 021 K.H.No.407A Block Mahipalpur Extension New Delhi PAN/GIR No.AABCI6188D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) ITA No.69/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) ITA No.71/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) & Dy. CIT CC 6(4) Vs. M/s. Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd., 19th Floor, (Formerly Rattan India Nasik Air India…

Mukesh Mittal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-41(1), New Delhi

ITA 761/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15
Section 10(38)Section 11(1)Section 11(4)Section 11BSection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No.152/Del/2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15) Sh. Mukesh Mittal, Income tax Officer, 138, Deepali Enclave, Ward-41(1), Pitampura, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi- 110 034 PAN –AJGPM 2125D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA Respondent by Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR 06.01.2021 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 26.03.2021 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM: The present appeal is pref…

Ritu Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle, New Delhi

ITA 9358/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsian, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiqu Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 68

…roviding the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO. The assessee had discharged the onus initially cast upon it by providing the basic details which were not suitably enquired into by the AO.” 27. In the case of Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd 110 Taxmann.com 64, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the review petition, held as under: “However, on going through the judgments of the CIT, ITAT and the High Court, we find that on merits a disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) allowed…