CIT v. Padamchand Ramgopal

76 ITR 719Supreme Court of India1970#2959 most cited

What is CIT v. Padamchand Ramgopal authority for?

Minor irregularities in books of account cannot be the sole basis for rejection of the books or for making an estimated trading addition, especially when the assessee has provided explanations for discrepancies. The case distinguishes itself by focusing on receipts not brought into account rather than expenses claimed.

40

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Padamchand Ramgopal · Padamchand Ramgopal · 76 ITR 719 · rejection of books of account · estimated income · minor irregularities · trading addition · section 145(3) · section 69b · section 145 · sundry creditors · section 44ab · section 131 · section 133a · scrutiny assessment · undisclosed income · speaking order · section 143(2) · section 132 · section 132(1) · 143(3) · 142(1) · 153A · 153C

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 153C

Issues it is cited on

rejection of books of accountsection 145(3)section 69bsection 145sundry creditorssection 44absection 131section 133ascrutiny assessmentundisclosed incomespeaking ordersection 143(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Padamchand Ramgopal

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 6168/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 68

…afford a ground for resorting to section 145(3) or estimation of income. So long as it is not impossible to deduce the true income from the accounts maintained by the assessee, its computation cannot be made in any other way". CIT v Padamchand Ramgopal (1970) 76 ITR 719 (SC). "In order to reject the account the AO has to establish that income cannot be properly deduced from the accounts maintained by the ITA No. 6168/Del/2016 & 21 CO No. 9/Del/2017 Sunil Nayyar assessee. In order to arrive at such a conclusion, it must be shown that the Assessing' Officer has taken into consideration the various factors and ha…

ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Grandiose Jewellery P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील िं./ Ita No.1413/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer M/S Grandiose Jewellery Pvt. Ward-2(1)(4), R.No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd., 402-B, 4Th Floor, Glitz बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mall 99, Vithalwadi, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-02 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaagca5371D अपीलार्थी की ओर े/ Appellant By Shri Rahul Raman, Cit Dr : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े/ Respondent By : Shri Prakash Jotwani, Ar ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2020 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03.02.2020

For Respondent: Shri Prakash Jotwani, AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “B” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल, लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील िं./ ITA No.1413/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer M/s Grandiose Jewellery Pvt. Ward-2(1)(4), R.No.553, 5th Floor, Ltd., 402-B, 4th Floor, Glitz बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mall 99, Vithalwadi, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-02 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAAGCA5371D अपीलार्थी की ओ…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 288/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 287/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nitin Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 286/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 126/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 125/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 124/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ales consideration over & above to whatever recorded in books of accounts than in such case no addition can be made on the basis of presumption, assumption and guess work. Also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V/s Padamchand Ramgopal (SC) 76 ITR 719 and Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Mahesh Chand 199 ITR 247 very clearly state that no addition in subsequent years can be made merely because some addition has been made in earlier years. Similarly in our case no adverse inference can be drawn on extrapolation, assumption, presumption and on guesswork ad infinitum especially when the department h…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 477/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…T, Pune) c) Dr. RML Mehrotra vs. ACIT (68 ITD 288) (ITAT, All.) d) Anjenaya Brick Works vs. ACIT (74 TTJ Bangalore 921) e) Poornima Beri vs. DCIT (264 ITR AT 54) (Amritsar) f) CIT vs. Gupta Abushan Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 166) (Del) g) CIT vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (76 ITR 719) (SC) h) CIT vs. Ghodavath Pan Masala P. Ltd. (250 ITR 570) (Mum) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) 6.1 It was submitted that in the above cases, the additions based on estimate were deleted, but in the case of the assessee, there was a clear evidence. According to the Ld. DR, the CIT(A) had…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 476/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…T, Pune) c) Dr. RML Mehrotra vs. ACIT (68 ITD 288) (ITAT, All.) d) Anjenaya Brick Works vs. ACIT (74 TTJ Bangalore 921) e) Poornima Beri vs. DCIT (264 ITR AT 54) (Amritsar) f) CIT vs. Gupta Abushan Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 166) (Del) g) CIT vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (76 ITR 719) (SC) h) CIT vs. Ghodavath Pan Masala P. Ltd. (250 ITR 570) (Mum) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) 6.1 It was submitted that in the above cases, the additions based on estimate were deleted, but in the case of the assessee, there was a clear evidence. According to the Ld. DR, the CIT(A) had…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 326/COCH/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…T, Pune) c) Dr. RML Mehrotra vs. ACIT (68 ITD 288) (ITAT, All.) d) Anjenaya Brick Works vs. ACIT (74 TTJ Bangalore 921) e) Poornima Beri vs. DCIT (264 ITR AT 54) (Amritsar) f) CIT vs. Gupta Abushan Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 166) (Del) g) CIT vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (76 ITR 719) (SC) h) CIT vs. Ghodavath Pan Masala P. Ltd. (250 ITR 570) (Mum) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) 6.1 It was submitted that in the above cases, the additions based on estimate were deleted, but in the case of the assessee, there was a clear evidence. According to the Ld. DR, the CIT(A) had…

I.T.O WD - 4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Martin Burn Construction Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2154/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Raviito, M/S. Martin Burn Vs Ward-4(2), P-7, Construction Pvt.Ltd., 1, Chowringhee Square, R.N.Mukherjee Road, Aayakar Bhavan, 8Th Kolkata-700001. Floor, Kolkata-700001. Pan-Aabch2152C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Saurabh Kumar, Addl.Cit, Sr. Dr Respondent By Sh. Arvind Agarwal, Advocate & Sh. Rajat Agarwal, Aca Date Of Hearing 18.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 07.12.2018 Order

Section 145(3)

…ad estimated the income based on a percentage of Sales considerations. (e) The AO had not identified any Accounting Standard notified u/s.145(2) of the Act which was not followed by the assessee. Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed in CIT v Padamchand Ramgopal 76 ITR 719 (Se) that minor mistakes cannot be a ground for rejection of books of accounts. (f) In view of the above and after consideration of A.O.'s Remand Report & appellant's comments thereon, it cannot be said that the completeness and correctness of the accounts of the assessee 3 are not satisfactory. And therefore, the books of accounts of the appella…

Jai Nakoda Roadways Pvt. Ltd., Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-2, Ajmer

In the result, all these three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 694/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2018AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Borad (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 145(3)

…f freight payment cannot be doubted and a reason for rejection of books of account. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (1970) 76 ITR 719 (SC) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that insignificant mistakes cannot be a ground for resorting to Section 145 of the Act. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Telelinks Vs. CIT, Bhatinda order dated 20/11/2014 in ITA No. 269/2014 and submitted that when the asses…

Amit Road Carrier India Pvt. Ltd., Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-3, Ajmer

In the result, all these three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 677/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2018AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Borad (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 145(3)

…f freight payment cannot be doubted and a reason for rejection of books of account. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (1970) 76 ITR 719 (SC) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that insignificant mistakes cannot be a ground for resorting to Section 145 of the Act. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Telelinks Vs. CIT, Bhatinda order dated 20/11/2014 in ITA No. 269/2014 and submitted that when the asses…

Shri Agarsen Transways Pvt. Ltd., Nasirabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-3, Ajmer

In the result, all these three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 676/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2018AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Borad (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 145(3)

…f freight payment cannot be doubted and a reason for rejection of books of account. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Padamchand Ramgopal (1970) 76 ITR 719 (SC) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that insignificant mistakes cannot be a ground for resorting to Section 145 of the Act. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Telelinks Vs. CIT, Bhatinda order dated 20/11/2014 in ITA No. 269/2014 and submitted that when the asses…

ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Archana Construction Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 235/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Archana Construction Ward-12(2), Aaayakar Pvt. Ltd., 132, Dr. Bhawan, P-7, Meghnad Saha Sarani, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700029 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaeca 8420 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 16-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 24-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Directed Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 16.12.2015 In Case No.194/Cit(A)-4/Ward-12(2)/Kol/14-15, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Rejecting Assessee’S Books Thereby Estimating Net Profit @ 3% To The Tune Of ₹74,20,370/-, In Proceedings U/S 144/145(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short As ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. It Is Therefore Proceed Ex Parte.

Section 144Section 145(3)

…fied in the same year and it has no impact on the profit disclosed by the company. This cannot be the reason to reject the accounts u/s. 145(3). The books cannot be rejected on insignificant mistake a held by the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Padmachand – 76 ITR 719. The jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Ashoke Refractories Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 457 has also given the same view. Having regard to the entire factum of the matter and having also considered the judicial precedence in this regard as in the foregoing. I do not find any merit in the action of the AO in rejecting the books…

ITO, Bundi vs. Rameshwar Meena, Bundi

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

ITA 470/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Roshanta Meena (J.CIT)

…Tax World 821 • Mohd. Umer v. CIT 101 ITR 525 • Ajanta Construction (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT XXII TW 606 • DCIT Vs. Associated Stone Industries XXII TW 155 • Ghewarchand Vs. ITO XXI TW 571 • Siddheshwari Cotton Mills P. Ltd. V. CIT 117 ITR 953 • Padampath Ramgopal 76 ITR 719 • Malt Bru Ltd. 34 TW 246 • Manohar Lal V. ITO 68 TTJ 27 • Shri Gautam Textile V. ITO 72TTJ 169 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has not disputed the fact that it failed to produce any supporting evidence as well as on books of accounts to substantiate the claim of transportation e…

Harbans Lal Sethi, Jaipur vs. Addl. CIT, Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 495/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2017AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT-. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…time to time. The AO has not at all judiciously considered submissions made before the AO. Minor irregularities, even assuming were there, cannot be made a basis of the rejection of the books of accounts or of trading addition. Kindly refer Padampath Ramgopal 76 ITR 719 (SC). Hence the invoking of section 145 please be quashed and consequently the impugned additions be deleted in full. B. On merits: Alternatively, on merits also, there was no case with the AO to have made this addition, as submitted herein below: 1.1 Fair estimation required - Legal Position: At the very outset, it is submitted that even invoking…

Galaxy Impex, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

In the result, the disallowance made

ITA 529/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Prithivi Raj Meena (Add. CIT)
Section 145(3)

…ng GP rate of 46%. Hence, the impugned addition kindly be deleted in full. 4.13. Minor irregularities, even assuming were there, cannot be made a basis of the rejection of the books of accounts or of trading addition. Kindly refer Padampath Ramgopal (1970) 76 ITR 719 (SC). 17 M/s Galaxy Impex Vs. C.I.T.(A), Jaipur 4.14. It was further submitted that the assessee has been carrying on the same business in the same set up and under the same facts and circumstances. Even the manner and method of recording the transactions has also been the same since AY 2003-04. All along in the past, the cases of the assessee a…

Mohd. Const. Co., Kota vs. Addl. CIT, Kota

ITA 649/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2017AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (Addl. CIT)
Section 145(3)Section 44A

…m time to time. The AO has not at all judiciously considered submissions made before the AO. Minor irregularities, even assuming were there, cannot be made basis of the rejection of the books of accounts or of trading addition. Kindly refer Padampath Ramgopal 76 ITR 719 (SC). What is pertinent to note is that the AO has very categorically admitted in the assessment order as regards the fact of maintenance of complete books of account; that the same are audited; were duly produced before him and the contract receipts duly reconciled with the TDS certificates. The fact of claiming labour payments based on the labo…