How many judgments cite CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.?

85 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. (332 ITR 396), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 1961, Section 46A, Section 69C.

CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.

332 ITR 396High Court2011#1349 most cited

What is CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) must admit additional evidence if it is crucial for the proper disposal of the appeal, ensuring substantial justice to the appellant.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. · Rule 46A admission additional evidence · Commissioner (Appeals) powers · crucial for appeal disposal · Delhi High Court 2011 · Section 143(3) assessment · Section 68 cash credit · genuineness of transaction · assessee submission additional documents · substantial justice principle · 332 ITR 396 · appellate stage evidence

Also reported as

20 Taxmann.com 681

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 142(1)Section 1961 Section 46A Section 69C Section 144B Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

admission of additional evidence rule 46a section 80i addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction section 37(1)section 133(6)section 69c income-tax officer salary commissioner (appeals)section 68

Judgments citing CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5465/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

…r to that effect." (emphasis supplied) It has similarly been held in the following decisions  CIT v Chittosho Motors: ITA 741 of 2010: 11 taxmann.com 81 (P&H.  Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd vs CIT: 133 ITR 231 (P&H) CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd 332 ITR 396 (Del)  CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India: 314 ITR 55 (Del)  -CIT vs. Chandra Kant Sahu Bhai: 202 Taxman 262 (Del)  CIT vs. Betterways Finance: ITA 995 of 2009 (Del)  Jatia Investment Co vs. CIT: 206 ITR 718 (Cal)  Electra (Jaipur) Ltd vs. IAC. 26 ITD 236 (Del Trib.)  Y. W. C. A. of India vs. IAC: 29 ITD 620 (Del Trib.) It would be appreciated t…

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5624/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

HASBRO SA,SWITZERLAND vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAX), CIRCLE 1(1)(1), DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with above directions for statistical purposes

ITA 2842/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 250

…filing of additional evidence, is handmade for justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence. In the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits Lad: 332 ITR 396 (Delhi), the Hon, jurisdictional High Court held that the CIT(A) may admit additional evidence, after obtaining a remand report from the assessing officer, if the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant is crucial to the disposal of the appeal. Hon'ble ITA T Delhi have also held in the case Of Electra (Jaipur) (R) Lid v. IAC (1988) 26 ITD…

M/S PARASNATH FUELS (P) LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalparasnath Fuels Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle 1(1), 28 Feet Road, Dehradun Vikas Nagar, Vs Dehradun - 248198 Pan-Aaicp2190D Assessee Revenue Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am, This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appellate Centre [Cit(A), In Short], Dated 08.10.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10104734 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dt. 08.10.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Assumption Of Jurisdiction In Initiating The Proceedings U/S 147 & Passing The Impugned Order U/S 147/144B & That Too Without Complying With Mandatory Conditions U/S 147 To 151A Parasnath Fuels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 68

…in the prayed made for the admission of additional evidences and in the larger interest of justice by respectfully following the judgements of the hon’ble Jurisdictional high court in the case of CIT Vs. Virgin Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd reported in (2011) 332 ITR 396(Delhi), we admit the additional evidences filed before us under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules and remand the matter back to the file of the AO to consider the same and pass the order denovo afresh in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to appear and filed any further details…

JCIT(OSD), DELHI vs. AVON METERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNJAB

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

ITA 328/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER JCIT (OSD), vs. Avon Meters Private Limited, Delhi. D – 15, Focal Point, Derabassi, Mohali – 140507 (Punjab). (PAN : AABCA3428Q) Avon Meters Private Limited, vs. JCIT (OSD), D – 15, Focal Point, Derabassi, Delhi. Mohali – 140507 (Punjab). (PAN : AABCA3428Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri V Rajakumar. Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.09.2025 Date of Order : 26.11.2025 O R D E R PER S. R…

AVON METERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI

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

ITA 5794/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

DCIT-1(1),BHILAI, BHILAI vs. SALIGRAM TRIPATHI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 582/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.582/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR

Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.582/RPR/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Saligram Tripathi 32/32 Bunglow, Bhilai Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 006 PAN: ADEPT2799J ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : None (Petition filed) Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of P…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

ITA 1352/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1352/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Income Tax Officer, Goldendunes Heights LLP Vs. Jaipur. C-6, Vashisht Marg, Hamuman Nagar Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAOFG4799C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A. jktLo…

BSC C&C JV,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4546/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Bsc C&C Joint Venture, Vs. Acit, 74, Hemkunt Colony, Circle-62(1), New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadfb8115G Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…re crucial for consideration of the claim of deduction and the same ought to have been admitted by the Learned CITA. He placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Virgin Securities and Credits private limited reported in 332 ITR 396 (Del) and CIT vs Text Hundred India private limited reported in 239 CTR 263 (Del) for admission of the additional evidences in support of the claim of deduction. However, he fairly stated that for the year under consideration , the learned CITA had sought to completely reject the additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee and consequentia…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 307/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…e additional evidences without which the proper income of the assessee could not be determined in the interest of justice. Here, we wish to place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd., [2011] 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein the Hon'ble Court held that the CIT(A) should admit the additional evidence if he finds that the same is crucial for the disposal of the appeal. Further, the decision of the CIT(A) is supported by the decision of the Co–ordinate Bench of the Tribunal rendered in Bhavya Lakhani Traders & Suppliers (P) Ltd. ITA no.5409/Del./2010, A.Y…

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. RAJKUMARI DHARAMPAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 289/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…l evidences under Rule 46A, without which the proper income of the assessee could not be determined in the interest of justice. The said facts is supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd. [2011] 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein the Hon'ble Court held 8 Smt. Rajkumari Dharampal Agarwal ITAno.235/Nag./2016 ITANo.289/Nag./2016 that the CIT(A) should admit the additional evidence if he finds that the same is crucial for the disposal of the appeal. The decision of the learned CIT(A) is supported by the decision of the Co–ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Delhi…

SMT RAJKUMARI DHARAMPAL AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 1(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 235/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

ABDUL AZIZ,DUDU vs. ITO WARD 7(3), LAL KOTHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1025/JPR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…e additional evidences are crucial and its consideration and\nappraisal would render substantial justice to the appellant, the same deserve to be\naddressed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in judgement in CIT vs. Virgin\nSecurity & Credit Private Limited (2011) 332 ITR 396(Del.) has held that the\nCIT(A) should admit the additional evidence if he finds that the same is crucial\nfor the disposal of the appeal. Further, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case\nof Chandrakant Janu Bhai Patel 202 Taxman 262 has held that if additional\nevidence is without any blemish, in order to advance the cause of justice, the\nsam…

DYNAMIC TRANSMISSION LTD.,ROHTAK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE , ROHTAK

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

ITA 328/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

JIWAN ABASAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 12(2), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2089/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 14A

…has been filed by the assessee by way of additional evidences in fact could not be submitted during the assessment stage. The Ld. Counsel cited the decision passed by the Hon’ble High Court in CIT vs. Virgin Securities and Credits Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2011] 332 ITR 396 and further decision passed in Chandrakant Chanu Bhai Patel 202 Taxman 262 (Del). 3 I.T.A. No. 2089/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jiwan Abasan Pvt. Ltd. 5. The Ld. D.R supports the impugned order. 6. Upon hearing the counsel of the respective parties, we perused the order passed by the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of the assessment…

NISHA BHRADWAJ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3 (3), JAIPUR

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

ITA 617/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kaushik (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

…es are crucial and its consideration and appraisal would render the substantial justice to the appellant and has placed reliance on certain decisions viz. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities andCredits P. Ltd (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del), Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of ChandrakantChanu Bhai Patel 202 Taxman 262 and decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land AcquisitionVs Mst. Katiji [ 1987 (2) TMI 61 SUPREME COURT). The said claims have been perused. The reasons given by the appellant for non submission of these details before A…

ACE CABS LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), DELHI, C R BUILDING

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanace Cabs Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaica4494R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 04.10.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short]/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 12.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Submitted An Application Under Rule 29 Of The Itat Rules For Admitting The Additional Evidences & The Contents Thereof Are Reproduced Below:-

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACE Cabs Limited, vs. ACIT, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAICA4494R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date of Order : 04.10.2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi…

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 324/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 324/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke DCIT, Paradise Properties, Circle-06, Vs. Sarojni Marg, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAIFP 8247 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 12/JP/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 324/JP/2024) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Paradise Prope…

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER Pragati Power Asst. CIT Corporation Ltd. Circle-20(1) Himadri Rajghat Power Vs. New Delhi House, Office Complex Rajghat New Delhi-110002 PAN:AACCP 8035F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri S. Krishnan, Adv. & Shri Shaurya Jain, CA Respondent by Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement 14/08/2024 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the o…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 NASSHIK, NASHIK vs. HARSH CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, NASHIK

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

ITA 302/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 Pan: Aacch2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2023 Of The Cit(A) / Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In The Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance To Rs.2,24,191/- As Against Rs.1,25,51,607/- Proposed By The Assessing Officer In The Remand Report As Against Rs.4,38,96,880/- Added By Him In The Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj S. DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 133Section 133(5)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…the Commissioner of Income Tax(A), then the procedure prescribed in the said Rule has to scrupulously followed. Otherwise it would reduce Rule 46A to a dead letter. 2. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del), held that the CIT(A) should admit the additional evidence if he finds that the same is crucial for the disposal of the appeal. 3. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chandrakant Chanu Bhai Patel 202 Taxman 262, held that if additional evidence is without any blemish and in order to advance the cause of justice, the same ought…

Showing 1–20 of 85 · Page 1 of 5