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

332 ITR 396High Court2011#1344 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.

85

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 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 68Section 142(1)Section 1961Section 46ASection 69CSection 144BSection 153A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

admission of additional evidencerule 46asection 80iaddition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionsection 37(1)section 133(6)section 69cincome-tax officersalarycommissioner (appeals)section 68

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

Bharti Airtel Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO (TDS), New Delhi

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3595/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…, ‘H’ Bench, Delhi in the case of JCIT vs. Venus Financial Services Ltd. reported in (2012) 21 taxmann.com 436 (Delhi) 84. The Assessee also relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. 332 ITR 396. 85. We have perused these decisions. These are distinguished on facts. When the Ld. DR has not disputed the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that sufficient time was not granted to the assessee to file the requisite details. He has also not disputed the finding that these documents are crucial for adjudicating this aspect. These were not the facts in t…

Bharti Airtel Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO (TDS), New Delhi

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3594/DEL/2012[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…, ‘H’ Bench, Delhi in the case of JCIT vs. Venus Financial Services Ltd. reported in (2012) 21 taxmann.com 436 (Delhi) 84. The Assessee also relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. 332 ITR 396. 85. We have perused these decisions. These are distinguished on facts. When the Ld. DR has not disputed the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that sufficient time was not granted to the assessee to file the requisite details. He has also not disputed the finding that these documents are crucial for adjudicating this aspect. These were not the facts in t…

Bharti Airtel Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO (TDS), New Delhi

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3593/DEL/2012[2008-09 (F.Y. 2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…, ‘H’ Bench, Delhi in the case of JCIT vs. Venus Financial Services Ltd. reported in (2012) 21 taxmann.com 436 (Delhi) 84. The Assessee also relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. 332 ITR 396. 85. We have perused these decisions. These are distinguished on facts. When the Ld. DR has not disputed the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that sufficient time was not granted to the assessee to file the requisite details. He has also not disputed the finding that these documents are crucial for adjudicating this aspect. These were not the facts in t…

M/S. Btm Exports Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result we allow the application of the assessee for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules

ITA 1541/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri At Varkeyay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. SK Jain, D.R
Section 68

…ng on the issue which needs to be decided by the Tribunal and ends of justice demand admission of such an evidence, the Tribunal can pass an order to that effect.” Further the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities & Credits P.Ltd. 332 ITR 396 at para 8 held as follows. "8. The aforesaid contention appears to be devoid of any merit. It is a matter of record that before admitting the additional evidence, the CIT (A) had obtained remand report from the AO. While submitting his report, the AO had not objected to the admission of the additional evidence, but had merely reiterated the conte…

Bg Exploraiton & Production India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. DIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 195Section 40

…ITA NO. 500/Del/2013 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.500/Del/2013 A.Y. : 2006-07 BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION ADDL. DIRECTOR OF INCOME INDIA LIMITED, VS. TAX, (INTERNATIONAL C/O NANGIA & COMPANY TAXATION), SUITE 4A, Plaza M-6, INCOME TAX OFFICE, Jasola, SUBHASH ROAD, New Delhi – 110 025 DEHRADUN – 248001 (PAN: AAACE4569K) UTTARAKHAND (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Anshul Sachar, Adv. Dep…