CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria

66 ITR 443Supreme Court of India1967#365 most cited

What is CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria authority for?

The appellate authority cannot enhance an assessment by considering a source of income that was not examined by the Assessing Officer. The scope of appellate power is limited to the subject matter considered by the Assessing Officer.

239

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria · section 31(3) · appellate enhancement · Assessing Officer's scope · undisclosed income · appellate jurisdiction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 153ASection 251Section 69ASection 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 31(3)section 251(l)(a)place of effective managementsection 6(3)section 127(1)section 245halegal expensessection 31ddtsection 251(2)preponderance of probabilityprincipal officer

Judgments citing CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria

DCIT Circle 2(1), Trichy vs. The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur

ITA 1321/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 677 & 678/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd, Deputy Commissioner Of Central Office, V. Income Tax, Erode Road, Circle -2(1), Karur – 639 002. Trichy. [Pan: Aaact-3373-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1343 & 1321/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd, Income Tax, V. Central Office, Circle -2(1), Erode Road, Trichy. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaact-3373-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Anandhan, Ca & Smt. Lalitha, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Anandhan, CA and Smt. Lalitha, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 36(1)(viii)Section 41(1)Section 43B

…ellate Assistant Commissioner has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering a new source of income not considered by the Income Tax Officer in the order appealed against. A similar view was expressed in CIT v. RaiBahadurHardutroyMotilalChamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC). That also related to a case under section 31(3) of the old Act. It was held that the power of enhancement under section 31(3) of the old Act was restricted to the subject-matter of the assessment or the source of income, which had been considered expressly or by clear implication by the assessing officer from the point of view of taxability…

Prashant Pitti, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3032/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2016-17 Prashant Pitti, Vs. Acit, C-179, Central Circle-4, Vivek Vihar, Delhi. New Delhi-110095. Pan Awxpp4522D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri P N Barnwal, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68Section 69A

…ITA No.- 3032/Del/2022 Prashant Pitti INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year 2016-17 Prashant Pitti, Vs. ACIT, C-179, Central Circle-4, Vivek Vihar, Delhi. New Delhi-110095. PAN AWXPP4522D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. & Shri Anoop Mehta, CA Department by: Shri P N Barnwal, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing: 21.11.2023 Date of 07.02.2024 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.10.2022 of the…

Edelweiss Asset Management Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3020/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule , Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 154Section 25tSection 270ASection 37(1)

…me of the assessee in the appellate order but has added a new source of income which is not permissible under the law. The ld. AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443(SC) wherein it is held that "the principle that emerges as a result of authorities of this Court is that the appellate Asst. Commissioner has no jurisdiction under section 31(3) of the Act to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income Tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or 6…

Dharmendra Vaishnav, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward, Phalodi

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

ITA 162/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Laxman Singh Gurjar, Sr. DR
Section 246

…served that after considering the statutory provisions of section 246, 246A, 248, 250 and 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and judicial pronouncements in the case of CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC), CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC), CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee 118 ITR 461 (SC) and CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2016] 240 taxman 133 held that: "(C.2.1) In view of the foregoing, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the Assessee in limine for non-prosecution of appeal by assessee. We set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and we…

Hillway Sadhna Co Op Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

ITA 2675/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K Shivram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Joginder Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)(d)

…t, the order passed has to be set-aside with a direction to decide assessee's appeal on merit. In support of his contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions;- i) CIT v/s Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria, [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC); ii) Biswaranjan Bysack v/s CIT, 1967] 66 ITR 452 (SC); (ii) CIT v/s Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), ITA no.2336 of 2013, dated 25.04.2016; [2017] 297 CTR 614 and v) M. Loganathan v/s ITO, [2013] 350 ITR 373 (Mad.). 8. The learned Departmental Representative submitted, since the assessee filed a letter seeking withdrawal of appeal, it was n…

M/S Alpha Reality, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 3, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1706/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1706/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Alpha Reality Acit No.1-A, 4Th Floor, Jhava Plaza, Non-Corporate Circle-3, बनाम/ Vs. Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajfa-8210-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjunraj (Ca)- Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-11-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjunraj (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…an appeal filed by the assessee, the AAC has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering a new source of income not considered by the ITO in the order appealed against. A similar view was expressed in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC). That also related to a case under section 31(3) of the old Act. It was held that the power of enhancement under section 31(3) was restricted to the subject matter of assessment or the source of income, which had been considered expressly or by clear implication by the Assessing Officer from the point of view of taxability and that the AAC ha…

DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Goel Exim India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 1592/DEL/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. M/S. Goel Exim India Pvt. Ltd. 2606/4, 1St Floor, Solitaire Plaza, Central Circle-28, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 Pan : Aaccg1799B (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Goel Exim India Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd.2606/4, Central Circle-28, 1St Floor, Solitaire Plaza, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 Pan : Aaccg1799B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Vs. M/s. Goel Exim India Pvt. Ltd. 2606/4, 1st Floor, Solitaire Plaza, Central Circle-28, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 PAN : AACCG1799B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) M/s. Goel Exim India Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd.2606/4, Central Circle-28, 1st Floor, Solitaire Plaza, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 PAN : AACCG1799B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of he…

Goel Exim India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi

ITA 1201/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. M/S. Goel Exim India Pvt. Ltd. 2606/4, 1St Floor, Solitaire Plaza, Central Circle-28, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 Pan : Aaccg1799B (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Goel Exim India Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd.2606/4, Central Circle-28, 1St Floor, Solitaire Plaza, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 Pan : Aaccg1799B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Vs. M/s. Goel Exim India Pvt. Ltd. 2606/4, 1st Floor, Solitaire Plaza, Central Circle-28, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 PAN : AACCG1799B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) M/s. Goel Exim India Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd.2606/4, Central Circle-28, 1st Floor, Solitaire Plaza, New Delhi Gurudwara Road Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 PAN : AACCG1799B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of he…

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1519/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ DELHI) BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT& SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1518 and 1519/Del/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 Sanjeev Agarwal ACIT, Central Circle-15 1, Maharaja Lal Lane New Delhi Vs. Civil Lines New Delhi-1100 54 (PAN:ABOPA4675N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, Advs. Respondent by : Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.09.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Thesetwo appeals filed b…

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1518/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ DELHI) BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT& SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1518 and 1519/Del/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 Sanjeev Agarwal ACIT, Central Circle-15 1, Maharaja Lal Lane New Delhi Vs. Civil Lines New Delhi-1100 54 (PAN:ABOPA4675N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, Advs. Respondent by : Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.09.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Thesetwo appeals filed b…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4973/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4972/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4971/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4970/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4969/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4968/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has revisional powers, but that they are confined to what was before the Income-tax Officer and considered by the latter.” 24. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 had an occasion to adjudicate on similar grievance as under: “The AAC has no jurisdiction, under s. 31(3) of the Act, to assess a source of income which has not been processed by the Income tax Officer and which is not disclosed either in the returns filed by the assessee or in the assessment order, and therefore. the Appellate Assistant Commis…

Anil Gupta, Jaipur vs. I.T.O. Ward 6(1), Jaipur, Rajasthan

ITA 12/JPR/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. Mehta (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 23(4)(b)Section 80C

…rminus with that of the ITO, the ld. CIT(A) can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he felt to do so. In this context, useful reference is made to the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 wherein the proposition has dealt by the court that the assessee having once filed an appeal, cannot withdraw it and even if the assessee has reduced to appear at the hearing, first the appellate authority can proceed with the enquiry and if he finds that there is under assessment, he can enhance the assessment just as, once the assessment proce…

M/S. Satia Industries Limited, Muktsar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 193/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 144C(8)Section 250oSection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.193/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s Satia Industries Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Malour Road, Vill. Rupana, Assessment Centre, Distt. Muktsar. Assessment Unit, I.T. [PAN:-AACCS7233A] Department New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Sh. P.N. Arora & Ashwani Juneja, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Girish Bali, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 17.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 13.06.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal o…

Apeejay Shipping Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T CC - III, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2485/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT,DR
Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 251Section 251(2)Section 80G

…had applied his mind to the particular subject matter with a view to its taxability or its non- taxability and not to any incidental connection. 6.3. It is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC)that powers of enhancement conferred on the appellate authority extendsonly to matters considered by the Income-tax Officer. 6.4. In the present appeal, it is not a case where the three issues have been considered but addition on that account is not made in the assessment order by the ld. AO. Had it been such a case, it would clearly follow t…

Taiyab Chaudhary S/O Yakub Chaudhary, Baghpat vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 144/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Yamini Gautam, Sr. DR

…e Assistant Commissioner has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering a new source of income not considered by the Income Tax Officer in the order appealed against. A similar view was expressed in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC). That also related to a case under section 31(3) of the old Act. It was held that the power of enhancement under section 31(3) of the old Act was restricted to the subject- matter of the assessment or the source of income, which had been considered expressly or by clear implication by the assessing officer from the point of view of taxability…