CIT v. Orissa Corporation

159 ITR 1787Reported decision#10247 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

bogus share capitalretracted statementcreditworthiness of the creditoraddition under section 68section 132(1)search assessmentaddition u/s 68accommodation entrysection 133asection 132(4)section 131section 37

Judgments citing CIT v. Orissa Corporation

ACIT CENTRAL CIR-4(4), MUMBAI vs. NADIADWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 2238/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

ACIT CENTRAL CIR-4(4), MUMBAI vs. NADIADWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 2237/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

ACIT CENT. CIR-4(4), MUMBAI vs. NADIADWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 2223/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

ACIT CENT. CIR -4(4), MUMBAI vs. NADIADWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 2221/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIDWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1497/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIDWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4 (4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1496/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIDWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1495/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIDWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1494/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIDWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1493/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

NADIADWALA GRANDSON ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1492/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…th from the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohamad Hanif Vs. CIT [50 ITR 1] and Roshan Di Natti Vs. CIT [107 ITR 938] as already cited in the above decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court. Similar is the ratio of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation [159 ITR 1787]. It is the law that additions could not be made merely on the basis of doubts, conjectures or surmises. After considering the entire case law as discussed above we find that the case la considered by the Revenueauthorities were rendered under different set of facts which cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Accordingly the case l…

CIT v. Orissa Corporation (159 ITR 1787) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax