CIT v. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh

200 ITR 788High Court1993#2702 most cited

What is CIT v. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh authority for?

No addition for unexplained expenditure under Section 69C can be made when books of account are maintained and expenditure is recorded with full details and supported by vouchers.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh · Section 69C · unexplained expenditure · books of account · expenditure vouchers · deemed income · no addition under 69C · Pratap Singh Amar Singh · 200 ITR 788 · Rajasthan High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 132Section 139Section 69CSection 147Section 148Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 44afillegal paymentsection 131(1)(d)section 55asection 142(2)section 38section 142acircle ratesection 131(1)section 69dsection 69bsection 55

Judgments citing CIT v. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Jabalpur vs. M/S. Vijan Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 38/JAB/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 37 & 38/Jab/2020 (A.Y: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dcit, Central Circle, Vs. Vijan Hotel Pvt Ltd, 291, Ramnath Bldg, Khasra No114/2 & Napier Town, Part Of 107, Jablapur-482001, Mandla Road, Tilhari Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur-482001. Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Abzpn0126C Appellant .. Respondent C.O No.02 & 03/Jab/2021 (A.Y: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vijan Hotel Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, Khasra No114/2 & 291, Ramnath Bldg, Part Of 107, Napier Town, Mandla Road, Tilhari Jablapur-482001, Jabalpur-482001. Madhyapradesh. Madhyapradesh Pan/Gir No. : Abzpn0126C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant/Respondentby Shri, Saad Kidwai. Cit Dr Respondent/Appellantby Shri.Dhiraj Ghai. Fca. Ar Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

Section 131(1)Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…It has been held in the case of CIT v/s lahsa Construction (P) Ltd (2013) 357 ITR 671 (Delhi) that no addition can be made solely on the basis of valuation report of DVO. Ld AR also placed reliance on the decision of CIT v/s VS Pratap Singh Amro Singh (1993) 200 ITR 788 (Raj) that ITA.NO.37&38/JAB/2020 C.O.02&03/JAB/2021. M/s Vijan Hotel Pvt Ltd, Jabalpur. . CIT(A)-3/BPL/IT-10703, 10704 & 10709/2019-20 A.Y. 2014- 15, 2016-17 & 2017-18 addition to income could not be made on the basis of the report of the Valuation Officer. 4.1.9 In view of the above discussion, the comparative picture of investment shown by t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 193/RPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 192/RPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 191/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 190/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 189/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, Raipur vs. Lord Buddha Educational Society, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue ITA Nos

ITA 188/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.188 To 193/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013 To 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-1, Raipur(Cg) Vs M/S Lord Buddha Educational Society, M/S Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (Rims), Gram Godhi, Bhansoj Road, Office Nh-6, Raipur (Cg) Pan No. :Aaaal 3913 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(3)

…981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 has been followed. 6. In view of the aforesaid position order of the Tribunal does not require Interference. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (7) CIT Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 Held, that there was no dispute that the assessee maintained proper books of account and the same have been accepted in the past and no defects were pointed out in the books. The expenses were fully supported by the vouchers. Full details were also mentioned in respect of each item in the books. Simply because the valuation report was of a higher…

Rajni Tak, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234A

…ined by the assessee showing cost of construction, the AO was not justified in making reference to Valuation cell and then addition on that basis under sec. 69” 11 SMT. RAJNI TAK VS ITO, WARD 5(1), JAIPUR In CIT v/s Pratap Singh, Amorsh Sing, Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788(SC) held “ In respect of investment made in the property there can be only two method to find out the correct position (one, when proper books of accounts are maintained and two valuation report). If the assessee maintained proper books of account and all the details mentioned in such books of account which were duly supported by vouchers and no…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 25/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 24/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 23/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

ACIT Central Circle 3 (1), Chennai vs. Smt Sasikala Raghupathy L/H of Late B G Raghupathy, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1512/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

ACIT Central Circle 3 (1), Chennai vs. Smt Sasikala Raghupathy L/H of Late B G Raghupathy, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1511/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

ACIT Central Circle 3 (1), Chennai vs. Smt Sasikala Raghupathy L/H of Late B G Raghupathy, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1510/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 116/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…indings. 16. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amrosingh Rajendra Singh, [1993] 200 ITR 788. We have gone through case laws cited by the assessee and find that the Hon’ble High Court in the facts of case had held that if the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and all details are mentioned in such books of account, which were duly supported by vouchers and no defects are pointed out and the books are not rejected, the figur…

Teen Murti Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4223/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4223/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Teen Murti Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, C/O Raj Kumar & Associates, Ca, Central Circle, L-7A (Lgf), South Extension, Part-Ii, Ghaziabad New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct3359B Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.10.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 55ASection 69

…ls Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (177 CTR 232) 4 Teen Murti Products Pvt. Ltd. held that 10% of the difference of the value estimated by the DVO is liable to be ignored. 3. The Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT Vs Pratap Singh, Amro Singh, Rajendra Singh 200 ITR 788 held that 10% difference in the valuation being an issue of estimation, can be ignored. 4. Section 55A(b) reads as under: “Section 55A. With a view to ascertaining the fair market value of a capital asset for the purposes of this Chapter, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of capital asset to a Valuation Officer- (a)…………… (b) ….., i…

ITO, Baran vs. Ganpati Plaza, Alwar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 545/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

…should have been accepted by the authorities below. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdiction High Court in case of CIT vs Hotel Joshi 242 ITR 478 as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court in case of Pratap Shingh Amro Singh Rajedra Singh 200 ITR 788 and contended that when the books of account are not rejected the addition based on valuation report is not sustainable. The ld. AR of the assessee has further contended that the DVO has adopted the total cost by applying CPWD rates however, the ld. CIT(A) has also not computed the correct cost of construction even by applying the State PWD ra…

Ganpati Plaza, Jaipur vs. ITO, Behror

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 467/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

…should have been accepted by the authorities below. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdiction High Court in case of CIT vs Hotel Joshi 242 ITR 478 as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court in case of Pratap Shingh Amro Singh Rajedra Singh 200 ITR 788 and contended that when the books of account are not rejected the addition based on valuation report is not sustainable. The ld. AR of the assessee has further contended that the DVO has adopted the total cost by applying CPWD rates however, the ld. CIT(A) has also not computed the correct cost of construction even by applying the State PWD ra…

Ganpati Plaza, Jaipur vs. ITO, Behror

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 466/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

…should have been accepted by the authorities below. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdiction High Court in case of CIT vs Hotel Joshi 242 ITR 478 as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court in case of Pratap Shingh Amro Singh Rajedra Singh 200 ITR 788 and contended that when the books of account are not rejected the addition based on valuation report is not sustainable. The ld. AR of the assessee has further contended that the DVO has adopted the total cost by applying CPWD rates however, the ld. CIT(A) has also not computed the correct cost of construction even by applying the State PWD ra…

S.K. Thermoformers, Alwar vs. ITO, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 180/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 142ASection 69

…rly when the books of accounts have been accepted by the AO and this sustaining of addition of Rs. 9,18,505/- is against the decision of the jurisdictional high court decision as given in case of CIT vs. Pratap Singh Amro Singh Rajendra Singh and Deepak Kumar 200 ITR 788 (Raj.)’’ M/s. S.K. Thermoformers vs ITO, Ward- 1(5), Jaipur 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of disposable items in the name and style as M/s. S.K. Thermoformers. The assessee filed its return of income on 19-09-2013 declaring NIL income. The survey was conducted at the business premi…