What is CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. authority for?

An appellate authority cannot introduce a new source of income that was not considered by the Assessing Officer; taxability of new sources should be addressed through reassessment provisions like Section 147/148 or revision under Section 263.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co.?

240 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. (251 ITR 864), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 147, Section 263, Section 148, Section 251(1)(a).

CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. (251 ITR 864)

Kishor Gorakhnaht Bhagwat, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 7 (4), Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1295/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1295/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Kishor Gorakhnath Vs. Ito, Ward-7(4), Pune. Bhagwat, A-103, Suyog Shivalaya, Sinhagad Road, Dattawadi, Pune-411030. Pan : Afapb9960M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri M. K. Kulkarni Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 27.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27.07.2022 : आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2009-10 Arises Against The Cit(A)-8, Pune’S Order Dated 09.07.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-8/Ito. Wd. 7(4)/407/18-19/121 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Shri M. K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 54

…altogether a new head of income in first appellate proceedings goes contrary to the settled legal proposition in CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Union Tyres (1990) 240 ITR 556 (Delhi) and CIT vs. M/s. Sardarilal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) (FB). The impugned latter addition stands deleted for this precise reason alone. The Revenue’s vehement argument supporting the same are rejected therefore. 3 No other argument or ground has been pressed during the course of hearing. 4. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced on this 27th day of July, 20…

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 2089/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2089/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Naveen Tyagi Ito C/O M/S Sanjeev Anand & Vs. Ward 1(2), Associates, 77, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Admpt7873K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…I.T.A.No.2089/Del/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2089/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Naveen Tyagi ITO C/o M/s Sanjeev Anand & Vs. Ward 1(2), Associates, 77, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. PAN No. ADMPT7873K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent S/Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Adv. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shrey Jain, Adv. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 19.05.2022 20.06.2022 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदे…

Melongos India Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corp Ward -4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 863/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

…ns / sources of income would fall outside the ambit of provisions of section 251 of the Act in regard to enhancement of income. The ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the case law of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co., [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) and argued that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has categorically held that whatever the question of taxability of income from a new sources of income is 7 concerned, which had not been considered by the AO in the assessment order, jurisdiction to deal with the same in appropriate cases may be dealt with u/s.147 or u/s. 263 of the Act as the…

Toffee Agricultural Farms Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 25(3), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4903/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 2Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

…arned CIT(Appeals) tantamount to assess a new source of income not forming part of the assessment order. Learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Sardari Lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864. Further reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Union Tyres (1999) 240 ITR 556 (Del). Further reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Naresh Khattar (HUF) 261 ITR 664. He further placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court ren…

Usha Anandan, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 964/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1298/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Cross Objection No.128/Chny/2013 [In Ita No.1298/Chny/2013] िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04

For Appellant: Mr.R.Sivaraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 149(1)(a)

…basement and ground floor of the building. The assessee has challenged enhancement of income made by the Ld.CIT(A) in light of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sardari Lal reported in 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) argued that the Ld.CIT(A) does not have power to enhance the assessment, in case, the proposed enhancement is on account of the issue other than the issue challenged by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). We do not find any forces in the arguments of the assessee for the simple reason that the subject matter of the appeal before the CIT(…

ITO, Chennai vs. Usha Anandan, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1298/CHNY/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1298/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Cross Objection No.128/Chny/2013 [In Ita No.1298/Chny/2013] िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04

For Appellant: Mr.R.Sivaraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 149(1)(a)

…basement and ground floor of the building. The assessee has challenged enhancement of income made by the Ld.CIT(A) in light of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sardari Lal reported in 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) argued that the Ld.CIT(A) does not have power to enhance the assessment, in case, the proposed enhancement is on account of the issue other than the issue challenged by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). We do not find any forces in the arguments of the assessee for the simple reason that the subject matter of the appeal before the CIT(…

Naresh Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-46(2), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 8108/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 43(5)(d)

…ITA no. 8108/Del/2019 Naresh Sharma Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-2” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2016-17 Naresh Sharma Vs Income-tax Officer, Prop. Of Shiv Shakti Textiles, Ward-46(2), New Delhi 4280/2A, Jogiwara, Shiv Shakti Market, Nai Sarak, Delhi-110006. PAN- ABDPS5862Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Sh. Naman Gupta, CA Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 04.01.2022 Date of pronouncement 11.02.2022 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Comm…

Frick India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our

ITA 330/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate and Shri Pulkit Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Varma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 263Section 94(7)

…s. 2072/Del/2008 & 330/Del/2012 – A.Ys 2004-05 & 2005-06 that the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Union Tyres (supra) had thereafter being confirmed by the “Full Bench” of the court in the case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co., 251 ITR 864 (Del). Also, we may herein observe, that the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal i.e. ITAT, Delhi Bench “E” in its order passed in the case of Hari Mohan Sharma (supra) had after exhaustive deliberations concluded, that CIT(A) is not competent to enhance assessment qua an issue that was not considered expressly or by necessary implication by the AO…

Frick India Ltd vs. DCIT Circle-11 (1)

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our

ITA 2072/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate and Shri Pulkit Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Varma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 263Section 94(7)

…s. 2072/Del/2008 & 330/Del/2012 – A.Ys 2004-05 & 2005-06 that the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Union Tyres (supra) had thereafter being confirmed by the “Full Bench” of the court in the case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co., 251 ITR 864 (Del). Also, we may herein observe, that the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal i.e. ITAT, Delhi Bench “E” in its order passed in the case of Hari Mohan Sharma (supra) had after exhaustive deliberations concluded, that CIT(A) is not competent to enhance assessment qua an issue that was not considered expressly or by necessary implication by the AO…

M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt.Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward, 2(2), Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/JPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 46/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinoba Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabct 7285 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Miss. Shivangi Samdhani (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 25/03/2021 For The A.Y. 2013-14 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Id. Cit(A), Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of Assessee Company For The Sole Reason Of The Appeal Having Been Filed With Delay. The Action Of Id. Cit (A) Is Illegal, Unjustified, Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please Be Granted By Setting Aside The Order Of Id. Cit (A). 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Id. Cit(A), Has Erred In Coming To The Conclusion That The Appeal Of The 2

For Appellant: Miss. Shivangi Samdhani (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…le Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (supra) and in case of CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutory Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC), the decision of the Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) (FB), besides various other decisions, it held that the powers under section 251 are, indeed, very wide; but, wide as they are, they do not go to the extent of displacing powers under, say, sections 147, 148 and 263. We also draw strength from the decision in the case of BP Sherafudin in [2017] 87 taxmann.com 330, wherein the Hon’ble Kera…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…T(A) to enhance the income. Reliance was placed on the case of Bikram Singh Vs DCIT; New Delhi of ITAT A Bench, New Delhi in ITA No.3522/DEL/2013, dated 13.04.2016,which considered the full bench decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Sardarilal & Co (251 ITR 864) and also Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistri Vs CIT (34 ITR 342) which was confirmed by the Apex Court in 44 ITR 891.” 13.1 However, the CIT(A) rejecting the submissions of the assessee, enhanced the income of the assessee by using powers u/s 251(2) of the Act. As contended by the ld. AR of the assessee that once t…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 651/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…T(A) to enhance the income. Reliance was placed on the case of Bikram Singh Vs DCIT; New Delhi of ITAT A Bench, New Delhi in ITA No.3522/DEL/2013, dated 13.04.2016,which considered the full bench decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Sardarilal & Co (251 ITR 864) and also Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistri Vs CIT (34 ITR 342) which was confirmed by the Apex Court in 44 ITR 891.” 13.1 However, the CIT(A) rejecting the submissions of the assessee, enhanced the income of the assessee by using powers u/s 251(2) of the Act. As contended by the ld. AR of the assessee that once t…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 650/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…T(A) to enhance the income. Reliance was placed on the case of Bikram Singh Vs DCIT; New Delhi of ITAT A Bench, New Delhi in ITA No.3522/DEL/2013, dated 13.04.2016,which considered the full bench decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Sardarilal & Co (251 ITR 864) and also Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistri Vs CIT (34 ITR 342) which was confirmed by the Apex Court in 44 ITR 891.” 13.1 However, the CIT(A) rejecting the submissions of the assessee, enhanced the income of the assessee by using powers u/s 251(2) of the Act. As contended by the ld. AR of the assessee that once t…

C.M.Gopal, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 884/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 C.M. Gopal, Hyderabad. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Pan – Abvpc 2460L Central Circle – 2, Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao Revenue By Shri Yvst Sai Date Of Hearing: 16/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2021

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 44A

…nhanced the income of the assessee by way of bringing new source of income and in support of his arguments, he relied on the following case law: 1. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 144 ITR 891(SC) 2. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 34 ITR 342 (Bom.) 3. Sardari Lal & Co, 251 ITR 864 (Del.) 4. CIT Vs. B.P. Sherfuddin, 881 & 1291 of 2009 (Ker.) 5. Mylan Laboratories Ltgd., 113 Taxmann.com 6 (ITAT-Hyd.) :- 16 -: Sri CM Gopgal, Hyd. 13.1 On perusal of the order of the CIT(A) as well as the order of AO, we find that the CIT(A) has only dealt the issues which have been borne out of the order of AO and, therefore, the arguments a…

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…r to introduce in the assessment a new source of income and the assessment must be confined to those items of income which were the subject-matter of the original assessment. 50. In course of time, Union Tyres was doubted. In CIT v. Sardari Lal and Co. [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) [FB], the same issue whether the appellate authority has the power under section 251 to discover a new source of income was referred to a Full Bench. After examining the authorities holding the fielding on that issue, the learned Full Bench has held that the inevitable conclusion is that whenever the question of taxability of income from…

M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-2, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1194/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1194/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinobha Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabct 7285 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Rohan Sogani (Ca) & Shri Rajeev Sogani (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 23/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/04/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- I, Jaipur Dated 13/09/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. (A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Enhancing The Income By Disallowing Interest Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Illegal, Unjustified, Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please Be Granted By Allowing The Said Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. (B) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Exercising The Powers Of Enhancement Under Section 251(1)(A).

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…le Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (supra) and in case of CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutory Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC), the decision of the Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi) (FB), besides various other decisions, it held that the powers under section 251 are, indeed, very wide; but, wide as they are, they do not go to the extent of displacing powers under, say, sections 147, 148 and 263. We also draw strength from the decision in the case of BP Sherafudin in [2017] 87 taxmann.com 330, wherein the Hon’ble Kera…

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…R 443( SC)  CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria ( 1967) Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria ( 1967) 66 ITR 443  CIT vs. Union Tyres reported in 240 ITR 556 [Delhi] CIT vs. Union Tyres reported in 240 ITR 556 [Delhi] CIT vs. Sardarilal & Co. [2001] 251 ITR 864 (Delhi)  CIT vs. Sardarilal & Co. [  CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. CIT vs. National Co. Ltd. (1993) 199 ITR 445 (Cal) 4.1. He referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of dgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of dgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur Coal Syndicate (supra), and submitted that and…

Ace Infracity Developers P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1087/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 115BSection 132Section 2Section 69

…sdictional ITAT as under: (a) Sh. Vikrant Puri vs ACIT; 142 & 5789/Del/2013; dt. 04/03/2016 (b) Holcim (India) Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, 2013-TIOI-903-ITAT-DEL (c) CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria, (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) (d) CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. 251 ITR 864 (Del)(FB) (e) CIT(A) vs. Union Tyres; 240 ITR 556 (Del) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) has given a detailed finding as to why the set off of depreciation requires to be confirmed and relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material…

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1266/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…Ld. CIT(A) cannot enhance the income by considering the new source i.e., entire Bank deposits as unexplained. He has relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Del.) and CIT vs., Sardari Lal & Company 251 ITR 864 (Del.). 16 ITA.Nos.1265 & 1266/Del./2019 Shri Parveen Garg, New Delhi. 7. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand submitted that the A.O. considered the issue of unexplained cash deposits in the Bank accounts of the assessee and without any justification determined the income by estimating on account of commission earned despite no evidence of source of…

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1265/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…Ld. CIT(A) cannot enhance the income by considering the new source i.e., entire Bank deposits as unexplained. He has relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Union Tyres 240 ITR 556 (Del.) and CIT vs., Sardari Lal & Company 251 ITR 864 (Del.). 16 ITA.Nos.1265 & 1266/Del./2019 Shri Parveen Garg, New Delhi. 7. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand submitted that the A.O. considered the issue of unexplained cash deposits in the Bank accounts of the assessee and without any justification determined the income by estimating on account of commission earned despite no evidence of source of…

CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co.

What is CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Sardari Lal & Co.

Kishor Gorakhnaht Bhagwat, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 7 (4), Pune

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

Melongos India Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corp Ward -4(1), Chennai

Toffee Agricultural Farms Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 25(3), New Delhi

Usha Anandan, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

ITO, Chennai vs. Usha Anandan, Chennai

Naresh Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-46(2), New Delhi

Frick India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Frick India Ltd vs. DCIT Circle-11 (1)

M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt.Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward, 2(2), Jaipur

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

C.M.Gopal, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-2, Jaipur

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

Ace Infracity Developers P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi