How many judgments cite CIT v. Om Overseas?

60 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Om Overseas (315 ITR 185), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Om Overseas come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 1961, Section 145(3), Section 115BBE, Section 133(6), Section 147.

CIT v. Om Overseas

315 ITR 185High Court2009#1918 most cited

What is CIT v. Om Overseas authority for?

A cash deposit in a bank account, traceable to the available cash balance as per the assessee's cash book, cannot be treated as unexplained under Section 68 or 69A. The Assessing Officer cannot reject books of account or make an addition without pointing out specific defects.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Om Overseas · 315 ITR 185 · Section 68 · Section 69A · Section 145(3) · unexplained cash deposit · cash sales · rejection of books of account · specific defects · cash book balance

Also reported as

173 Taxmann 185

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961 Section 145(3)Section 115BBE Section 133(6)Section 147 Section 148 Section 68

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 148b section 100 section 153(c)(1)section 94 abatement of assessment anonymous donation third party information onus of proof rejection of books of account section 153(c)sanction under section 151

Judgments citing CIT v. Om Overseas

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. M/S Sanjay Agrawal, Raipur

ITA 82/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 82/Rpr/2018 Co No.05/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sanjay Agrawal 35-36, Millenium Plaza, G. E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aapfs0532E ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2022

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण"यायपीठरायपुरम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 82/RPR/2018 CO No.05/RPR/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Sanjay Agrawal 35-36, Millenium Plaza, G. E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) PAN : AAPFS0532E ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, AR Revenue by : Shri G.N Singh, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur vs. Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Raipur

ITA 43/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 43/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…ec. 145 of the Act, before rejecting the books of 17 ACIT (Central)-2 Vs. Sri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal accounts of an assessee. Our aforesaid view is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Om Overseas (2009) 315 ITR 185 (P&H). In its aforesaid order the Hon’ble High Court while upholding the order of the Tribunal had observed, that as the AO had rejected the books of accounts of the assessee without pointing out any specific defect, therefore, the impugned addition was rightly deleted by the lower authorities. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the cas…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)-2, Raipur vs. M/S Radheshyam Agrawal, Raipur

ITA 42/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 42/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Radheshyam Agarwal L-24, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aacfr8916J ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

…falling within parameters of sub-section (3) of Sec. 145 of the Act, before rejecting the books of accounts of an assessee. Our aforesaid view is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Om Overseas (2009) 315 ITR 185 (P&H). In its aforesaid order the Hon’ble High Court while upholding the order of the Tribunal had observed, that as the AO had rejected the books of accounts of the assessee without pointing out any specific defect, therefore, the impugned addition was rightly deleted by the lower authorities. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the cas…

Rakesh Vaid, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 62(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA no

ITA 7821/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…f any specific defect being pointed in the books of accounts maintained by the appellant, the learned Assessing Officer was not 13 Rakesh Vaid Vs. ITO justified to reject the claim of appellant. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: a) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) CIT vs. OM Overseas b) 320 ITR 116 (All) CIT vs. Mascot India Tools & Forgings (P) Ltd. c) 64 DTR 409 (Jai) Asstt. CIT vs. Shankar Exports d) 325 ITR 13 (Del) CIT vs. Paradise Holidays e) ITA No. 999/2010 dated 03.08.2010 CIT vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. in, “3 It is settled law that in revenue matters, the onus of proof is not a st…

Kalaneedhi Jewellers LLP, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 311/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…288 (SC) • Mehta Parikh & Co. vs CIT [1956] 30 ITR 181 (SC) • ACIT vs. Roop Chand Tharani (2012) 66 DTR 104 (Chhattisgarh) • CIT vs. Paradise Holidays (2010) 325 ITR 13 (Del ) • CIT vs. Smt. Poonam Rani (2010) 326 ITR 223 (Del ) • CIT vs. Om Overseas (2009) 315 ITR 185 (P&H ) • CIT vs. Ludhiana Steel Rolling Mills (2007) 295 ITR 111(P&H) • CIT Vs K.C. Malhotra 164 Taxman 101 (P&H) • Eland International (P) Ltd. V/s Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax as reported in 124 TTJ 0554 (DEL-TRIB) • CIT vs. Jaora Flour and Foods (P) Ltd. as reported in 33 taxmann.com 566 (M.P) • CIT vs. Sudeep Goenka as reported in 29 tax…

Ssmt. Charu Aggarwal, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 310/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. N.R. Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vapi

In the result the ground No

ITA 1526/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, सुरत"ायपीठ, सुरत INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Hearing) I.T.(SS)A’s No.14,15,16/AHD/2016, ITA’s No.1302,1303& 3032/AHD/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Plot No.169 to 169, Phase No.1, Surat. GIDC, Vapi. [PAN: AAACN 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.(SS).A’s No. 46,47,48,49,1526 & 1527/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2012-13 The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Surat…

N.R. Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vapi vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 1302/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

ACIT, Sangrur vs. M/S Aggarsain Fibres Ltd., Samana

In the result, appeal of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 829/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…by the A.O. on account of low GP rate was deleted by observing that the audited books of accounts maintained by the assessee had been wrongly rejected. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Om Overseas(2009) 315 ITR 185 (P&H). 9. Now the Department is in appeal. 10. The Ld. Sr. DR reiterated the observations made by the A.O. and strongly supported the assessment order dt. 27/03/2014. It was further submitted that the assessee had not produced the production register even when the ample opportunities were given by the A.O. and that the notices issued to the par…

Rama Dairy, Bulandshahr vs. ACIT, Circle, Bulandshahr

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 5309/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…that every hear is independent. He further submitted that AO was not justified in adopting the result of AY 2010-11 also. In view of above contentions, he relied upon the following case laws:- - CIT vs. Poonam Rani 326 ITR 223 (Del.) - CIT vs. OM Overseas 315 ITR 185 (P&H). - ACIT vs. Budhalal & Co. 47 SOT 27 (Ahd.) - DCIT vs. Vishwanath Prasad Gupta 137 TTJ 385 TM Jabalpur - CIT vs. Ludhiana Steel Roll Mills 295 ITR 111 (P&H) - Aluminium Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 80 Taxman 184 (Gau.) 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR heavily supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that AO has reasonably estima…

M/S Subash Chander Aggarwal, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range II, Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 739/ASR/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Oct 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 738 & 739/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Deb (D.R.)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…reference respectively) to the declared gross profit, which stood confirmed in appeal for the same reason/s. Aggrieved, the assessee is in second appeal. 3. Before us, the assessee’s principal contention, relying on the decisions in CIT v. Om Overseas [2009] 315 ITR 185 (P&H) and CIT v. Ludhiana Steel Roll Mills [2007] 295 ITR 111 (P&H), was that no specific defect had been pointed out by the AO in rejecting the assessee’s books of account, so that the said rejection is not valid in law. On being questioned by the Bench about the correctness of the closing stock, the principal ingredient for arriving at the trad…

M/S. Sbash Chander Aggarwal, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax Range -II, Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 738/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 738 & 739/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Deb (D.R.)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Jsl Architecture Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3457/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT, Vs. M/s. JSL Architecture Ltd., Circle-2, Gurgaon Plot No.64-65, 2nd Floor, Udyog Vihar, Phase-4, Gurgaon PAN :AAJCS1552R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Sanjay Kumar Jain, Sr.DR Respondent by None Date of hearing 08.10.2018 Date of pronouncement 26.10.2018 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 17/03/2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Gurgaon [in short…

Bhwani Industires Limited, Mandi Gobindgarh vs. Asstt. Commisssioner of Income Tax, Patiala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 74/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhwani Industries Ltd., Vs. The Acit, Village-Ajnali, G.T. Road, Central Circle, Mandi Gobindgarh. Patiala. Pan No. : Aabcb5105H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Gupta, CIT(DR)

Section 132

…s of account of the assessee have been rejected. On query, it was submitted that in the past years also, the book results of the assessee have never been upset. Accordingly, relying upon CIT Vs Ceramic Industries 396 ITR 50 (Raj) and CIT vs Om Overseas (2010) 315 ITR 185 (P&H) it was his submission that the book results of the assessee on facts could not have been rejected. 5. The ld. CIT-DR Shri Ashish Gupta heavily relying upon the consistent orders of the authorities below conceding the issue submitted that even not withstanding the fact that the rolls and moulds were not manufactured by the assessee and were…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. M/S Jainco Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kota

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 755/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 755/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2014-15 cuke Assistant Commissioner M/s Jainco Enterprises Pvt. Vs. of Income Tax, Ltd., 592, Welcome Tower, Circle-1, Kota. Dadabari, Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCJ 6381 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : N…

Sneh Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 698/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 133ASection 40

…ce on the following decisions :- Pr. CIT vs. Hues India Ltd., 2015 TIOL 2275 (Raj.) Malani Rajjivan Jagannath vs. ACIT, 316 ITR 120 (Raj.) Ashoke Refractgories P. Ltd. vs. CIT 279 ITR 457 (Cal.) CIT vs. Smt. Poonam Rani, 41 DTR 194 (Del.) CIT vs. Om Overseas 315 ITR 185 ( P&H) CIT vs. Gotan Lisme Khaniz Udyog, 256 ITR 243 (Raj.) 4.1. On the contrary, the ld. D/R supported the orders of the authorities below. 4.2. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. While confirming the trading addition, the ld. CIT (A) in para 3.3 of his order…

Jaya Marketing, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 12 (3), Mumbai

ITA 5131/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Addl Cit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Aayakar Bhavan 2Nd Floor, M.K.Road Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Churchgate Mumbai - 400056 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Addl Cit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Mumbai - 400056 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Acit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Mumbai - 400056 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 254(2)

…Paradise Holidays 325 ITR 13 (High Court of Delhi)  Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bindals Apparels 332ITR410 42-47 (High Court of Delhi)  LaljiHaridas Vs. Income-tax Officer & Am 43 ITR 387 (Supreme Court India)  Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Om Overseas 315 ITR 185 (High Court of Punjab and Haryana) 24. The only issue which survives now is narrated by AO in para 4(b)(ii) i.e., whether assessee was justified in debiting its trading account by Rs.5,02,03,203.17 referred to as royalty in its books of account and forming part of its purchases. While recasting assessee’s trading account AO had declined the expe…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S Arihant Pulication (India) Ltd., Meerut

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5405/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 145(3)

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘A’, New Delhi Before : Shri I.C. Sudhir, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 5405/Del./2013 & 6640/Del./2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 A.C.I.T., Circle 1, vs. Arihant Publication (India) Ltd., Meerut. 24-26, Kalindi Colony, T.P. Nagar, (Appellant) Meerut. (PAN – AAECA 7236R) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR Revenue by Shri Deepak Kapoor, Advocate Date of Hearing 24.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement 16.06.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against the orders of ld. CIT(A),…

DCIT, Alwar vs. British Health Products (I) Ltd., Bhiwadi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 60/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar - DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

…ither the rejection of the books of account nor substitution of an estimated gross profit by rule of thumb was justified. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct.” 7. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High court in the case of CIT Vs Om Overseas [2009] 315 ITR 185 (P&H) held as under:- “The Assessee-firm derived its income from manufacturing and export of duries, rugs, woollen carpets, made ups, etc., and filed a nil return of income for the assessment year 2001-02. Subsequently it was assessed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and it declared gross profit on the total turnover of 25.38 per…

CIT vs. Jas Jack Elegance Exports

ITA/681/2010HC Delhi26 Apr 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN

For Appellant: Ms Suruchii AggarwalFor Respondent: CORAM:-

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…ITA No.681/2010 Page 1 of 8 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Delivered on: 26.04.2010 + ITA 681/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IX. … Appellant - versus - M/S JAS JACK ELEGANCE EXPORTS. ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Ms Suruchii Aggarwal For the Respondent : CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.K. JAIN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Repo…