CIT v. Vamadevan Bhanu

330 ITR 559High Court2011#8988 most cited

What is CIT v. Vamadevan Bhanu authority for?

An appeal does not lie against an addition made to income when the assessee has agreed to such addition. The assessee cannot challenge an assessment order based on their prior agreement.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

agreed addition · no appeal · CIT v. Vamadevan Bhanu · 330 ITR 559 · agreed assessment · voluntary acceptance of addition · assessment order challenge · revenue appeal · income tax appeal · assessee consent

Judgments citing CIT v. Vamadevan Bhanu

Silver Sand Productions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3831/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…tion and no evidence of any mala fide or coercion has been proved by the assessee. Reliance was placed in this case as under:- i. Sterlling Machine Tools (1980) 123 ITR 181 (All.) ii. Mahesh B. Shah vs ACIT (1998) (KER) and iii. CIT vs Vamadevan Bhanu (2011) 330 ITR 559 (Ker.) 6. Accordingly, she confirmed the Assessing Officer’s order. 7. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. I have heard ld. DR and perused the record. None appeared for the assessee despite notices. Upon careful consideration, I note that the Assessing Officer in this case has made ad-hoc addition of Rs.2 lakh…

Associated Machinery Corp. Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 4735/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)

…t 27 per cent for both the assessment years 1997-98 & 1998-99 specifically on condition that no penalty proceedings would be initiated u/s 271( 1)( c) . Hence it was not open to the assessee to appeal against the assessment orders. CIT v.VamadevanBhanu [2011] 330 ITR 559(Ker) The assessee had agreed to addition to income. Penalty for concealment can be levied if assessee offers no satisfactory explanation regarding such. Income. Commissioner of Income tax v. .JugalkishoreHargopal Das [2000] (Ker) Assessee filed return showing loss, although there was substantial turnover. The books of accounts suffered from vario…

DCIT, Rourkela vs. Shri Prashant Kumar Ahluwalia, Sundergarh

In the result, appeal of the department is allowed and that of the

ITA 63/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…f the Act, any assessee agreed by any of the order passed by the Assessing Officer may file appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). He further explained that as per the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs Vamadevan Bhanu, 330 ITR 559(Ker) that when the assessment was made on the basis of assessee’s agreement, then the assessee cannot be presumed to be aggrieved and cannot appeal against such order passed under his agreement. He also placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rameshchandra And Company vs CIT, 168 ITR 375 (Bom), Hon’ble P&…

Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3785/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh Vs. CIT, 125 ITR 239 had observed “ An order based on an agreement cannot give rise to grievance and the same cannot be agitated in appeal”. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Vamadevan Bhanu, 330 ITR 559 held that assessee cannot against an assessment on agreed basis. 6.3 The appellant made a very general submission that the said disallowance is not called for as the expenditure is incurred for business purposes. Mere assertion, without adducing any material evidence and documentation does not establish that the impugned expenditure is allowable…

Baring Pvt. Equity Partners (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee on these grounds is allowed for

ITA 5862/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiyaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5862/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Baring Pvt. Equity Partners Dcit (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Circle-4(1) A-16/9, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. New Delhi.

…l of the assessee. 4. It is well settled law that no appeal lies on agreed additions. We rely upon the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Jivat lal Purtapshi vs. CIT 65 ITR 261, judgment of Kerala High Court in the case of Vamadevan Bhanu vs. CIT 330 ITR 559 and judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh vs. CIT 125 ITR 239. Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the same income was offered in subsequent assessment year. However, he has not pointed out anything from the record why assessee did not make any request before AO for rectification of the order, if,…

Naresh Kumar, Noida vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Noida

In the result, ITA.No.6102/Del

ITA 6103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 80T

…at no appeal lies on agreed additions. I rely upon Judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jivatlal Purtapshi vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax [1967] 65 ITR 261 (Bom.), Judgment of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vamadevan Bhanu 330 ITR 559 (Kerala) and Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh 125 ITR 239 (P&H). In this case, the Ld. CIT(A) noted in the appellate order that Counsel for Assessee at the very outset, submitted that assessee had income from P.G. at Village Sultanpur, Noida which have not been disclosed by him in his…

Naresh Kumar, Noida vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Noida

In the result, ITA.No.6102/Del

ITA 6102/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 80T

…at no appeal lies on agreed additions. I rely upon Judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jivatlal Purtapshi vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax [1967] 65 ITR 261 (Bom.), Judgment of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vamadevan Bhanu 330 ITR 559 (Kerala) and Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh 125 ITR 239 (P&H). In this case, the Ld. CIT(A) noted in the appellate order that Counsel for Assessee at the very outset, submitted that assessee had income from P.G. at Village Sultanpur, Noida which have not been disclosed by him in his…

Ibg India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal of Assessee partly allowed

ITA 5651/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Kohli, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 154

…at no appeal lies on agreed additions. I rely upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jivatlal Purtapshi vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax [1967] 65 ITR 261 (Bom.), Judgment of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vamadevan Bhanu 330 ITR 559 (Kerala) and Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh 129 ITR 239 (P&H). Learned Counsel for the Assessee admitted that assessee did not move any application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act before the assessing officer, in case assessee did not agree for the addition. Since the assessing of…

Devendra Kumar Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee is dismissed

ITA 5159/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Anand, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. D.R

…es on agreed additions. We rely upon the decision of Hon’ble 6 ITA.No.5159/Del./2015 Devendra Kumar Singh, New Delhi. Bombay High Court in the case of Jivatlal Purtapshi 65 ITR 261 (Bom.), decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Vama Davan Bhanu 330 ITR 559 (Ker.) and decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh 125 ITR 239 (P & H). In this view of the matter, appeal of assessee was not maintainable before Ld. CIT(A) because the appeal was filed against the agreed additions above. No interference is required in the matter. Appeal of assessee has no merit an…

Aquagri Processing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2702/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Avinash Tripathi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vijay Kumar Jiwani, Sr. DR

…e, addition shall have to be confirmed. The Ld. CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh Vs. CIT, 125 ITR 239 and decision of Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vamadevan Bhanu, 330 ITR 559 and dismissed this ground of appeal of the assessee. 4. After considering the rival submissions, we do not find any merit on this ground of appeal of the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee sought adjournment, however, considering the facts of the case that addition was agreed before the AO, therefore, 4 ITA No.-2702/Del/2018. Aquagri Proc…

Ajay Goel, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 7269/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh.Bhavnesh Saini[Assessment Year: 2014-15] Vs Ajay Goel, Ito, C/O-Vinod Kumar Goel, 282, Ward-1(1), Boundary Road, Civil Lines, Meerut. Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aaqpg9765L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. V.K.Goel, Adv. Respondent By Sh. B.R.Mishra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 20.06.2018

…the appeal of the assessee. It is well settled law that no appeal lies on agreed additions. I rely upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case Jivat Lal Purtapshi 65 ITR 261, decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case Vama Davan Bhanu 330 ITR 559 and decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Banta Singh Kartar Singh 125 ITR 239. The assessee made a claim of deduction of the interest before the AO. However, the assessee submitted that wrong claim is made, therefore, agreed for the addition of the amount in question. Since the assessee agreed for addition before AO,…

M/S. Hotz Industries, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 4970/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Jashpal Singh Sethi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “SMC”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.4970/Del./2016 Assessment Year 2013-2014 M/s. Hotz Industries, 703-706, Chiranjiv Tower, The DCIT, vs. 43, Nehru Place, Circle – 11 (1), New Delhi – 110 019. New Delhi. PAN AAACH0092G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Jashpal Singh Sethi, CA For Revenue : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 11.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 11.11.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, New Delhi, Dated 12.08…

CIT v. Vamadevan Bhanu (330 ITR 559) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax