CIT v. Sunil Agarwal (

369 ITR 171High Court2014#332 most cited

What is CIT v. Sunil Agarwal ( authority for?

An addition to income based solely on a statement recorded under section 132(4) is not sustainable if that statement has been retracted and there is no corroborative material.

254

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sunil Agarwal · 369 ITR 171 · section 132(4) · retracted statement · corroborative material · evidentiary value · search and seizure · undisclosed income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153CSection 147Section 69ASection 69CSection 132

Issues it is cited on

section 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 153(a)section 158bbaccumulated profitsretracted statementsection 94section 2(22)section 2(22)(e)deemed dividendsection 268aretraction of statement

Judgments citing CIT v. Sunil Agarwal (

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…following decisions: i. CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Son : 210 Taxman 248 (SC) ii. Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT : 263 ITR 101 (Ker) iii. CIT vs. Dhingra Metal Works : 328 ITR 384 (Del) iv. CIT vs. Subhash Chand : ITA No. 875/2010 (Del) v. CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal : 379 ITR 367 (Del) vi. ITO vs. Vijay Kumar Kesar : 327 ITR 497 (Chattisgarh) vii. TDI Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT : (2009) 28 SOT 215 (Del) viii. Ashok Manilal Thakkar vs. ACIT : 279 ITR 143 (AT)(Ahd) ix. Meeta Gulgutia : 395 ITR 526 (Del) – para 40/41 He submitted that such statements, therefore, needs to be ignored from consideration. 29. Even otherwise…

M/S. Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…following decisions: i. CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Son : 210 Taxman 248 (SC) ii. Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT : 263 ITR 101 (Ker) iii. CIT vs. Dhingra Metal Works : 328 ITR 384 (Del) iv. CIT vs. Subhash Chand : ITA No. 875/2010 (Del) v. CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal : 379 ITR 367 (Del) vi. ITO vs. Vijay Kumar Kesar : 327 ITR 497 (Chattisgarh) vii. TDI Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT : (2009) 28 SOT 215 (Del) viii. Ashok Manilal Thakkar vs. ACIT : 279 ITR 143 (AT)(Ahd) ix. Meeta Gulgutia : 395 ITR 526 (Del) – para 40/41 He submitted that such statements, therefore, needs to be ignored from consideration. 29. Even otherwise…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- Noida, International Taxation, Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…following decisions: i. CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Son : 210 Taxman 248 (SC) ii. Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT : 263 ITR 101 (Ker) iii. CIT vs. Dhingra Metal Works : 328 ITR 384 (Del) iv. CIT vs. Subhash Chand : ITA No. 875/2010 (Del) v. CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal : 379 ITR 367 (Del) vi. ITO vs. Vijay Kumar Kesar : 327 ITR 497 (Chattisgarh) vii. TDI Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT : (2009) 28 SOT 215 (Del) viii. Ashok Manilal Thakkar vs. ACIT : 279 ITR 143 (AT)(Ahd) ix. Meeta Gulgutia : 395 ITR 526 (Del) – para 40/41 He submitted that such statements, therefore, needs to be ignored from consideration. 29. Even otherwise…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-6(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Marathon Fiscal Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5783/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhandeputy Commissioner Of Income M/S Marathan Fiscal Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-6(3), Marathan House, Room No. 1926, 19Th Floor, Lala Devi Dayal Road, Air India Building, Vs. Mulund (West), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400080 Mumbai – 400021

For Appellant: Shri Manjunath Swami &For Respondent: Shri J.P. Bairagra, A.R
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…he judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Product Company Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala 91 ITR 18 (SC). Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CIT Vs. Naresh K. Aggarwal (2014) 369 ITR 171 (AP). In the said case, it was observed by the Hon‟ble High Court that a statement recorded under sub-section (4) of Sec.132 shall be treated as a piece of evidence in the proceedings under the Act, as long as the said statement is not retracted. Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Agga…

M.S, Ultimate Builders, Bhopal vs. The ACIT-2, Bhopal

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 134/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2014-15 M/S. Ultimate Builders, Acit, Central-Ii, G-1, Kamdhenu Tower, E- Vs. Bhopal 2/22, Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aacfu8239M

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 17

…Ultimate Builders आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2014-15 M/s. Ultimate Builders, ACIT, Central-II, G-1, Kamdhenu Tower, E- Vs. Bhopal 2/22, Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AACFU8239M Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT Assessee by Shri S.S. Deshpande, CA Date of Hearing 25.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement 09.08.2019 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned appeal pertaining to the Assessment Year 2014-15 filed…

Ram Niwas Gupta, Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4883/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 143Section 153ASection 69B

…assessment order which is linked to the disclosure. d. In the statement also there is no linkage of any material to the impugned disclosure. e. He relied up on the decision of Hon Delhi high court in 397 ITR 82 and Andhra Pradesh high court in 370 ITR 671 and 369 ITR 171 and 379 ITR 367. He also referred to the circular of CBDT with respect to statement of disclosure to be linked with evidence. 24. Ld CIT DR also vehemently referred to several decision of Honourable High courts and submitted that when once the disclosure is made the addition is required to be made. 25. We have carefully considered the rival conte…

Ram Niwas Gupta, Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4882/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 143Section 153ASection 69B

…assessment order which is linked to the disclosure. d. In the statement also there is no linkage of any material to the impugned disclosure. e. He relied up on the decision of Hon Delhi high court in 397 ITR 82 and Andhra Pradesh high court in 370 ITR 671 and 369 ITR 171 and 379 ITR 367. He also referred to the circular of CBDT with respect to statement of disclosure to be linked with evidence. 24. Ld CIT DR also vehemently referred to several decision of Honourable High courts and submitted that when once the disclosure is made the addition is required to be made. 25. We have carefully considered the rival conte…

Ram Niwas Gupta, Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4881/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 143Section 153ASection 69B

…assessment order which is linked to the disclosure. d. In the statement also there is no linkage of any material to the impugned disclosure. e. He relied up on the decision of Hon Delhi high court in 397 ITR 82 and Andhra Pradesh high court in 370 ITR 671 and 369 ITR 171 and 379 ITR 367. He also referred to the circular of CBDT with respect to statement of disclosure to be linked with evidence. 24. Ld CIT DR also vehemently referred to several decision of Honourable High courts and submitted that when once the disclosure is made the addition is required to be made. 25. We have carefully considered the rival conte…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4966/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Aforesaid submissions is supported by the order of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Pratap Singh Rajendra Hamola & Co. reported in 19 DTR (Chd) 182, wherein it has been held that…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4965/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Aforesaid submissions is supported by the order of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Pratap Singh Rajendra Hamola & Co. reported in 19 DTR (Chd) 182, wherein it has been held that…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4964/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Aforesaid submissions is supported by the order of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Pratap Singh Rajendra Hamola & Co. reported in 19 DTR (Chd) 182, wherein it has been held that…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed and the

ITA 533/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.S. Sainia.Y. : 2009-10 Smt. Sushmita Gupta, Vs. Acit, Cc-2, 100, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 003 (Pan: Aczpg1440P) (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-32(1), Vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, Room No. 323, 3Rd Floor, 100, Sunder Nagar, Ara Centre New Delhi – 110 003 Jhandewalan Extn., (Pan: Aczpg1440P) New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)

…le atmosphere is of utmost pressure and therefore there is very little scope for free and fair thinking on the part of a person searched, which squarely covers the issue in dispute, hence, we draw support from the same. - CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal, (2014) 369 ITR 171, High Court of Andhra Pradesh “The circumstances under which a statement is recorded from an assessee, in the course of search and seizure, are not difficult to imagine. He is virtually put under pressure and is denied of access to external advice or opportunity to think independently. A battalion of officers, who hardly feel any limits on t…

Smt. Sushmita Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed and the

ITA 15/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.S. Sainia.Y. : 2009-10 Smt. Sushmita Gupta, Vs. Acit, Cc-2, 100, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 003 (Pan: Aczpg1440P) (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-32(1), Vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, Room No. 323, 3Rd Floor, 100, Sunder Nagar, Ara Centre New Delhi – 110 003 Jhandewalan Extn., (Pan: Aczpg1440P) New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)

…le atmosphere is of utmost pressure and therefore there is very little scope for free and fair thinking on the part of a person searched, which squarely covers the issue in dispute, hence, we draw support from the same. - CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal, (2014) 369 ITR 171, High Court of Andhra Pradesh “The circumstances under which a statement is recorded from an assessee, in the course of search and seizure, are not difficult to imagine. He is virtually put under pressure and is denied of access to external advice or opportunity to think independently. A battalion of officers, who hardly feel any limits on t…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6592/DEL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…the assessee not being confronted with the same and no opportunity having been given the assessee to cross-examine, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 65…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6591/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…the assessee not being confronted with the same and no opportunity having been given the assessee to cross-examine, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 65…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6590/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…the assessee not being confronted with the same and no opportunity having been given the assessee to cross-examine, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 65…

Padala V.V. Satyanarayana Reddy vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in appeal No

ITA 187/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 May 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble1. Sathi Suryanarayana Reddy Dcit, Kutukuluru Village Vs. Central Circle-1 East Godavari Dist. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Aqsps0318M 2. Kovvuri Adi Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 59-19-12, Jagannathpuram, Central Circle-1, Kakinada Basti, E.G. District. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Akypa 7366 B 3. Tadi China Venkata Reddy Vs. Dcit, Anaparthi Village, Central Circle-1 East Godavari District. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Alqpt 6801 P 4. Kovvuri Vijaya Suhdhara Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 6-64, Kondukuru Central Circle-1 Village,Bikkavolumandal, Visakhapatnam East Godavari Dist. Pan No. Btxpk 4927 K

Section 132Section 148

…of the Act required to be quashed and consequent assessments made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act are to be held as null and void and void abinitio. The assessee relied on the decisions of Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Brajesh Kuimar Agarwal 369 ITR 171 and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of S. Narayanappa Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Maulla 87 ITR 349 ad Laxmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that Mr. Y. Joji Reddy has entere…

Nallamilli Venkatakrishna Reddy vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in appeal No

ITA 186/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 May 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble1. Sathi Suryanarayana Reddy Dcit, Kutukuluru Village Vs. Central Circle-1 East Godavari Dist. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Aqsps0318M 2. Kovvuri Adi Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 59-19-12, Jagannathpuram, Central Circle-1, Kakinada Basti, E.G. District. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Akypa 7366 B 3. Tadi China Venkata Reddy Vs. Dcit, Anaparthi Village, Central Circle-1 East Godavari District. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Alqpt 6801 P 4. Kovvuri Vijaya Suhdhara Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 6-64, Kondukuru Central Circle-1 Village,Bikkavolumandal, Visakhapatnam East Godavari Dist. Pan No. Btxpk 4927 K

Section 132Section 148

…of the Act required to be quashed and consequent assessments made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act are to be held as null and void and void abinitio. The assessee relied on the decisions of Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Brajesh Kuimar Agarwal 369 ITR 171 and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of S. Narayanappa Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Maulla 87 ITR 349 ad Laxmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that Mr. Y. Joji Reddy has entere…

Mailavarapu Anantha Naga Narasimha Srikanth vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in appeal No

ITA 185/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 May 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble1. Sathi Suryanarayana Reddy Dcit, Kutukuluru Village Vs. Central Circle-1 East Godavari Dist. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Aqsps0318M 2. Kovvuri Adi Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 59-19-12, Jagannathpuram, Central Circle-1, Kakinada Basti, E.G. District. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Akypa 7366 B 3. Tadi China Venkata Reddy Vs. Dcit, Anaparthi Village, Central Circle-1 East Godavari District. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Alqpt 6801 P 4. Kovvuri Vijaya Suhdhara Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 6-64, Kondukuru Central Circle-1 Village,Bikkavolumandal, Visakhapatnam East Godavari Dist. Pan No. Btxpk 4927 K

Section 132Section 148

…of the Act required to be quashed and consequent assessments made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act are to be held as null and void and void abinitio. The assessee relied on the decisions of Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Brajesh Kuimar Agarwal 369 ITR 171 and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of S. Narayanappa Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Maulla 87 ITR 349 ad Laxmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that Mr. Y. Joji Reddy has entere…

Tetali Srinivasa Reddy vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the assessees in appeal No

ITA 184/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 May 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble1. Sathi Suryanarayana Reddy Dcit, Kutukuluru Village Vs. Central Circle-1 East Godavari Dist. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Aqsps0318M 2. Kovvuri Adi Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 59-19-12, Jagannathpuram, Central Circle-1, Kakinada Basti, E.G. District. Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Akypa 7366 B 3. Tadi China Venkata Reddy Vs. Dcit, Anaparthi Village, Central Circle-1 East Godavari District. Visakhapatnam Pan No.Alqpt 6801 P 4. Kovvuri Vijaya Suhdhara Reddy, Vs. Dcit, D.No. 6-64, Kondukuru Central Circle-1 Village,Bikkavolumandal, Visakhapatnam East Godavari Dist. Pan No. Btxpk 4927 K

Section 132Section 148

…of the Act required to be quashed and consequent assessments made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act are to be held as null and void and void abinitio. The assessee relied on the decisions of Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Brajesh Kuimar Agarwal 369 ITR 171 and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of S. Narayanappa Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Maulla 87 ITR 349 ad Laxmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that Mr. Y. Joji Reddy has entere…