Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon

248 ITR 310High Court2001#4159 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon authority for?

Assessments under Chapter XIV B of the Income-tax Act involve an element of guesswork, similar to best judgment assessments, but this guesswork must not be arbitrary.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dr. M.K.E Memon · 248 ITR 310 · Chapter XIV B · undisclosed income · best judgment assessment · guesswork · arbitrary assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 132(1)Section 132(3)Section 132(4)Section 139

Issues it is cited on

section 153a(1)(a)section 144bastatement under section 132(4)section 56(2)(vii)(b)section 158bcsection 142(2a)section 127panchnamasection 158bsection 153a(1)section 158block period

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon

DCIT Circle 1 Nashik, Nashik vs. Shree Sai Properties, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 987/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…the under-mentioned decisions. a) Common Cause v/s Union of India, 77 taxmann.com245 (SC); b) DCIT-vs-Sunil Kumar Sharma, 159 taxmann.com 179 (Karnataka) [2024] SLP dismissed in CIT-vs-Sunil Kumar Sharma, 165 taxmann.com 846 (SC)[2024] c) CIT-vs-M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.) (2001) d) ACIT-vs-Ms. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte, 87 taxmann.com 116 (Mumbai - Trih.) [2017] (Copies of the above decisions are submitted as part of the legal compendium on 28.10.2025). • It is further pointed out that additions based on documents found in the course of search action u/s 132 on Kokani Group Nashik stood deleted in the under…

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

ITA 813/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…herefore would have no application to the case of undisclosed income. We do not accept the above submission. As in case of best judgment assessment an assessment under Chapter XIV B of the Act also involves an element of guess work (see CIT v. Dr. M.K.E Memon 248 ITR 310). However the guess work should not be arbitrary....... As per the ratio of the judgement in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax-VII v. Chetan Das Lachman Das [2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi)/[2012] 211 Taxman 61 (Delhi)/[2012] 254 CTR 392 (Delhi) [07-08-2012], transaction can be presumed for whole period on basis of seized material - Seized…

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…herefore would have no application to the case of undisclosed income. We do not accept the above submission. As in case of best judgment assessment an assessment under Chapter XIV B of the Act also involves an element of guess work (see CIT v. Dr. M.K.E Memon 248 ITR 310). However the guess work should not be arbitrary....... (emphasis supplied) As per the ratio of the judgement in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax-VII v. Chetan Das Lachman Das [2012] 25 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi)/[2012] 211 Taxman 61 (Delhi)/[2012] 254 CTR 392 (Delhi) [07-08-2012], transaction can be presumed for whole period on basis of seize…

Sachin Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 59/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…rapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 tota…

Kamal Kant Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 53/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…rapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 tota…

M/S Standard Frozen Foods Exports Pvt Ltd, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 45/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…rapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 tota…

DCIT Cent.Cir-8(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Farooq Ali Khan, Mumbai

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

ITA 3925/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3925/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिधम/ DCIT, Central Cir-8(2) Shri Farooq Ali Khan 6th Floor, Room No.658, No.21, Benson A Cross Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Benson Town Post, Road, Mumbai-400020. Bangalore-560046. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABYPK7991D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Achal Sharma (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 22/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement…

Matrix India Entertainment Consultants Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC -8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals for 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 &

ITA 2938/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ramlal Negi

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…nnot be made for a different assessment year in respect of which there is no incriminating material namely CIT-1 v Jayaben Ratilal Sorathia (2014) 222 Taxman 64(Guj.) (Trib.) (Mag), Uday C Tamhankar v DCIT (2015) 174 TTJ 151(Mum)(Trib.), Dr M.K.E Memon (2008) 248 ITR 310 (Bom)(HC). Besides in the case .In Mehta Parikh & Co v CIT (1956) 30 ITR 181(SC), it is held that an Affidavit is valid unless proven false. The Supreme Court in Comman Cause v UOI [2017] [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) (Pg. No. 140-148) was dealing with incriminating materials in form of random sheets and loose papers, computer prints, hard disk, M/s. M…

Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee except ITA

ITA 3131/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray
Section 132(4)

…eld that on-money receipt should be worked out on the basis of incriminating documents found at premises of the assessee and not on the basis of estimation. The appellant also rely on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT Vs Dr M K E Memon( 248 ITR 310)(Bombay) and CIT Vs. C J Shah & Co. ( 246 ITR 671)(Bombay). In both these cases Hon’ble High Court has held that income cannot be made on estimation without any documents. Therefore, considering the facts of the case as well as judicial decisions on the issue it is requested to kindly delete addition made merely on the basis of third party eviden…

Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC -6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee except ITA

ITA 3129/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray
Section 132(4)

…eld that on-money receipt should be worked out on the basis of incriminating documents found at premises of the assessee and not on the basis of estimation. The appellant also rely on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT Vs Dr M K E Memon( 248 ITR 310)(Bombay) and CIT Vs. C J Shah & Co. ( 246 ITR 671)(Bombay). In both these cases Hon’ble High Court has held that income cannot be made on estimation without any documents. Therefore, considering the facts of the case as well as judicial decisions on the issue it is requested to kindly delete addition made merely on the basis of third party eviden…

Mokama Munger Highway Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2146/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri D.V. AnjaneyuluFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, (CIT) DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…as not involved before Hon'ble High Court. Accordingly, the ratio of Dr. Gurvinder Singh Randhawa is not applicable to the facts of the present case and the reliance placed by the learned DR is misplaced. We find in the case of CIT v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [(2001) 248 ITR 310 (Bom)], the learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Dr. M.K.E. Memon. However, the facts of the said case are not identical and not applicable to the present case. In the said case, the assessee was a general physician. Search was conducted on the assessee on 11.12.1996. In t…

Mokama Munger Highway Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2145/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri D.V. AnjaneyuluFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, (CIT) DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…as not involved before Hon'ble High Court. Accordingly, the ratio of Dr. Gurvinder Singh Randhawa is not applicable to the facts of the present case and the reliance placed by the learned DR is misplaced. We find in the case of CIT v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [(2001) 248 ITR 310 (Bom)], the learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Dr. M.K.E. Memon. However, the facts of the said case are not identical and not applicable to the present case. In the said case, the assessee was a general physician. Search was conducted on the assessee on 11.12.1996. In t…

Mokama Munger Highway Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1729/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri D.V. AnjaneyuluFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, (CIT) DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…as not involved before Hon'ble High Court. Accordingly, the ratio of Dr. Gurvinder Singh Randhawa is not applicable to the facts of the present case and the reliance placed by the learned DR is misplaced. We find in the case of CIT v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [(2001) 248 ITR 310 (Bom)], the learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Dr. M.K.E. Memon. However, the facts of the said case are not identical and not applicable to the present case. In the said case, the assessee was a general physician. Search was conducted on the assessee on 11.12.1996. In t…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1470/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1469/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1467/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1466/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1465/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi vs. Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1464/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

Gd Foods Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1190/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153A

…ial found during the course of search is not permitted. Reliance is placed on following (Copy of the same is enclosed) a) Commissioner of Income-tax v. H.C. Chandna (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 429 (Delhi); b) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon [2001] 248 ITR 310 (Bombay); c) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lachman Das Bhatia [2012] 26 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi); d) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pradeep Goel [2008] 174 TAXMAN 421 (DELHI); e) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product (P.) Ltd. [2009] 120 TTJ 387 (Ahmedabad) In view of the aforesaid, it is prayed that the addition is tota…

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dr. M.K.E. Memon (248 ITR 310) — Cited in 28 Judgments | BharatTax