Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT vs Anumpam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (P & H), ACIT v. Metro Construction Co. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 132(4A), Section 133A, Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 250.

CIT vs Anumpam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (P & H), ACIT v. Metro Construction Co. (148 TTJ 719)

Q: What is CIT vs Anumpam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (P & H), ACIT v. Metro Construction Co. authority for?

Additions made based solely on third-party statements without corroborative evidence or opportunity for cross-examination are invalid. Additions on the same transactions in the hands of the firm and individuals amount to double taxation.

Q: How many judgments cite CIT vs Anumpam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (P & H), ACIT v. Metro Construction Co.?

12 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT vs Anumpam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (P & H), ACIT v. Metro Construction Co. (148 TTJ 719), spanning 2018 to 2025.

The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Morbi vs. M/S. Kishan Plus Minarals, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue (In ITA No

ITA 124/RJT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.124/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.02/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Acit, Cent.Cir.2 M/S.Kishan Plus Minerals बनाम Rajkot. Jetpar Road, Nr. Pavadiyali Temple, Jasmatgadh Vs. Morbi. Pan : Aaqfk4689P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Counsel राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2025 (Originally Heard Refixed On 05.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /.ITA No.124/RJT/2021 WITH Cross Objection No.02/RJT/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 ACIT, Cent.Cir.2 M/s.Kishan Plus Minerals बनाम Rajkot. Jetpar Road, Nr. Pavadiyali Temple, Jasmatgadh Vs. Morbi. PAN : AAQFK4689P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Counsel राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date…

I.T.O. - 23(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Grace Development Associates, Mumbai

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

ITA 712/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 23(1)(5) Vs. M/S Grace Development Room.No.113,1St Floor Associates Matru Mandir, 101, B-Wing, Landmark Tardeo Road, Building, 1St Floor, 150 Mumbai – 400 007 Pali Road, Nr. Hdfc Bank, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400050. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfg5648M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Neeraja Sarma.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Devendra Jain.Ar Date Of Hearing 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms.Neeraja Sarma.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Devendra Jain.AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…ies of the seized material to the assessee nor had he allowed the assessee to cross- examine the concerned party. The honourable tribunal and the CIT(A) held that the entire addition made by the A.O. was invalid and deleted the said addition. > Sunita Dhadda, 148 TTJ 719 (Jp.) It was held that as per the principles of natural justice, it was obligatory on the part of the A.O. to have provided all the materials which were being used against the assessee. In case the AO was relying on the statements of a person then the assessee would have to be given an opportunity to cross examine. > DCIT vs. Mahendra Ambalal P…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Shri Abhishek L. Jain, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 344/SRT/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.344/Srt/2019 (Ay 2007-08) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Abhishek L.Jain 2(3)(7), Room No. 414, 4Th Prop Of Manglam Export, Vs Floor, Anavil Business Centre, 302, Pipla Sheri, Adajan-Hajira Road, Mahidharpura, Adajan, Surat-395003 Pan : Abxpj 0344 G Surat-395009 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…r of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC)  Mehta Parikh & Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC)  CIT vs. Odeon Builders Private Limited (Review Petition) (C) Diary No. 22394 of 2019  CIT vs. Sunita Dhadda 406 ITR 220 (Raj) 12 Sh. Abhishek L. Jain  Sunita Dhadda vs. DCIT 148 TTJ 719 (Jaipur Trib.)  PCIT Vs Tejua R Kapadia 24 taxmann.com 325 (SC)  PCIT Vs Tejua R. Kapadia [TA No.691/2017 (Guj)  DCIT vs. Mahendra Ambalal Patel TA No.462/1999 (Guj)  PCIT vs. Chartered Speed Private Ltd. TA No.126/2015 & 127/2015 (Guj)  ACIT vs. Vardhman Exports TA No.265/2008 (Guj)  CIT vs. M.K. Brothers 163 ITR 249 (Guj)  ACIT vs. Akrut…