CIT v. Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd.

203 ITR 630High Court1993#4641 most cited

What is CIT v. Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer (AO) must act based on material available on record or that which could and should have been collected, and failure to do so violates principles of natural justice. Assessments must be restored to the AO to provide an adequate opportunity of being heard.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd. · 203 ITR 630 · principles of natural justice · opportunity of being heard · Assessing Officer duty · evidence on record · violation of natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 1961Section 144Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 155bbesection 80ia(7)section 2(9)section 10basection 147(1)section 80a(5)section 66section 158b(b)bogus share capitalsection 80aconus of proofsection 153a(1)(a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd.

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is partly

ITA 342/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…dered for estimation of income. The past history is the best guide where provisions of s. 145(3) of the Act are invoked as held in Ajay Goyal vs. ITO (2006) 99 TTJ (Jd)164, Madan Lal vs. ITO (2006) 99 TTJ (Jd) 538, CIT vs. Popular Electric Co. (P) Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 630(Cal) and M.A. Rauf vs. CIT (1958) 33 ITR 843 (Pat). Once book results were rejected in terms of provisions of sec. 145(3) of the Act, it is not the ipse dixit of the AO to compute the income either u/s 144(1) or sec. 145(3) of the Act nor the computation and determination of income can be at the whims and fancies of the AO or the ld. CIT(A). Law…

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 673/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2019-20 cuke Shri Ambica Garments ACIT, Vs. 01, Behind Janta Sweets Home, Central Circle-03, Nai Sarak, Jodhpur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AATFS6984Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 671 to 676/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asses…

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 672/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2019-20 cuke Shri Ambica Garments ACIT, Vs. 01, Behind Janta Sweets Home, Central Circle-03, Nai Sarak, Jodhpur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AATFS6984Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 671 to 676/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asses…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 61/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2019-20 cuke Shri Ambika Garments ACIT, Vs. 01, Behind Janta Sweets Home, Central Circle-02, Nai Sarak, Jodhpur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AATFS6984Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 671 to 676/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asses…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 59/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2019-20 cuke Shri Ambika Garments ACIT, Vs. 01, Behind Janta Sweets Home, Central Circle-02, Nai Sarak, Jodhpur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AATFS6984Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 671 to 676/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asses…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 57/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2019-20 cuke Shri Ambika Garments ACIT, Vs. 01, Behind Janta Sweets Home, Central Circle-02, Nai Sarak, Jodhpur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AATFS6984Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 671 to 676/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asses…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 246/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ble on record or which the AO could and should have collected. Kindly\nrefer Brij Bhushan Lal Pradyuman Kumar v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524, CITv.\nLaxmi Naraian Badri Das (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and State of Kerala v. C. Valu\nKutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) and also 203 ITR 630 (Cal). However, the AO has not\nconfirmed to these principles.\nThus, it is a clear case of violation of the principals of natural justice hence, the impugned\nassessment kindly be restored to the file of the AO for providing an effective and\nadequate opportunity of being heard and to decide all the issues judiciously.\nHence our submission here…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 245/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ble on record or which the AO could and should have collected. Kindly\nrefer Brij Bhushan Lal Pradyuman Kumar v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524, CITv.\nLaxmi Naraian Badri Das (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and State of Kerala v. C. Valu\nKutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) and also 203 ITR 630 (Cal). However, the AO has not\nconfirmed to these principles.\nThus, it is a clear case of violation of the principals of natural justice hence, the impugned\nassessment kindly be restored to the file of the AO for providing an effective and\nadequate opportunity of being heard and to decide all the issues judiciously.\nHence our submission here…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ble on record or which the AO could and should have collected. Kindly\nrefer Brij Bhushan Lal Pradyuman Kumar v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524, CITv.\nLaxmi Naraian Badri Das (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and State of Kerala v. C. Valu\nKutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) and also 203 ITR 630 (Cal). However, the AO has not\nconfirmed to these principles.\nThus, it is a clear case of violation of the principals of natural justice hence, the impugned\nassessment kindly be restored to the file of the AO for providing an effective and\nadequate opportunity of being heard and to decide all the issues judiciously.\nHence our submission here…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…le on record or which the AO could and should have collected. Kindly\nrefer Brij Bhushan Lal Pradyuman Kumar v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524, CIT v.\nLaxmi Naraian Badri Das (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and State of Kerala v. C. Valu\nKutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) and also 203 ITR 630 (Cal). However, the AO has not\nconfirmed to these principles.\n\nThus, it is a clear case of violation of the principals of natural justice hence, the impugned\nassessment kindly be restored to the file of the AO for providing an effective and\nadequate opportunity of being heard and to decide all the issues judiciously.\n\nHence our submission…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…e Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). Wha…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…e Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). Wha…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…e Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). Wha…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…e Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). Wha…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…material. Reference in this case can be made on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. iii. iv. V. vi. vii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). Wha…

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 185/COCH/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…material. Reference in this case can be made on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H) 9. I…

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 184/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…material. Reference in this case can be made on the decision in the case of Abdul Baree Chowdhury v. CIT [1937] 5 ITR 170 PC. This decision was subsequently followed by several High Courts in following cases: - i. CIT v. Popular Electronic Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 630 (Cal) ii. Baliah v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 182 (Mys) iii. Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H) 9. I…

SATYA NARAYAN ,BHARATPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1434/JPR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1434/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Satya Narayan बनाम Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/s Shiv Charan Lal Satya Vs. Ward -1, Narayan, Navin Mandi Yard, Nadbai, Bharatpur Bharatpur स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAPPN9055M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Khandelwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…d GP Rate to 8 % without appreciating past history of the appellant & putting comparable cases on record. It has been held in various judgments that assessee’s past History is best guide for making estimation. Kindly refer CIT v/s Popular Electric Co.(P) Ltd. 203 ITR 630(Ker.) and M.A. Rauf v/s CIT 33 ITR 843(Pat.). The past history of the appellant is tabulated as under, which will depict that the GP Rate of 1.36 % declared by the appellant was reasonable & robust and backed by the maintenance of proper books of accounts: - Asst. yr Sales Gross Profit G.P.Rate Remarks (%) 2019-20 12,90,96,193.08 21,67,182.28 1.…

M/S RAJ AUTO WHEELS P .LTD.,AJMER vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, AJMER

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

ITA 397/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR
Section 131Section 145(3)Section 194ASection 40

…been accepted upto the level of Tribunal, Tribunal was justified in applying the same GP rate for the assessment year in question as against 15 per cent applied by the AO and 2.30 per cent declared by the assessee” CIT v/s Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd (1993) 203 ITR 630 (Cal), MA Rauf v/s CIT (1958) 33 ITR 843 (Pat). Also refer M/s Rishab Construction (P) Ltd. 38 TW 8 (JP) wherein it has been held that trading result should not be disturbed in a case wherein these are better than last year results even if provision of S. 145(3) are applicable. 3.Better Results: 3.1 We may submit that past history has been held t…

SHRI PATEL ENTERPRISES,,KORBA(CG) vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- KORBA,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose in terms of our observations as discussed herein above

ITA 112/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.112/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) M/S Patel Enterprises, Vs Dcit, Circle-Korba A-3, Vikas Complex, First Floor, Power House Road, Korba (C.G.) Pan No. : Aajfm 0718 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Chand Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 251

…CENTAGEOF N. P. (with Sales) Similarly since no evidence whatsoever was brought on record nor communicated to the assessee to justify estimation of NP @ 5%. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decisions in CIT v Popular Electric Co. (P)Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 630 (Cal.) and Ganga Prasad Sharma v CIT (1981) 127 ITR 27 (MP.) and various other decisions mentioned in Chhattishgarh Steel Casting Pvt. Ltd. v ACIT (2009) 12 ITJ 741 (ITAT-Bilaspur Bench) wherein it was held by the Jurisdictional Bench of the ITAT that assessment of income has to be made on available evidences as per s.143(3)(ii), which empowers t…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Popular Electric Co. Pvt. Ltd. (203 ITR 630) — Cited in 25 Judgments | BharatTax