COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. JIND CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

335 ITR 43High Court2011#20551 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115BBE Section 142(1)Section 154 Section 1961: Sections 68 Section 1962: Rule 46A(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

rule 46a section 68 section 143(3)india business document interest

Judgments citing COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. JIND CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb 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

…te authority. On the contrary, r. 46A permits the CIT(A) to admit additional evidence if he finds that the same is crucial for disposal of the appeal. (II) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. JIND CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT (2011) 335 ITR 43 Appeal [CIT(A)]—Additional evidence—Remand to AO vis-a-vis consideration by CIT(A)—It is not necessary that when additional evidence is furnished, the matter must be remanded to the AO—It depends on nature of issue and nature of evidence—In an appropriate case, without any prejudice to either of the parties, the evidence can be looked into by the…

Sanjeev Mittal, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle- II, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7454/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…he facts and relying on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT (1998) 231 ITR 1 (Bom) and decisions of Hon’ble P & H High Court in Arjun Dass vs. CIT (1975) 112 ITR 480 (P&H) and in CIT vs. Jind Co- operative Sugar Mills (2011) 335 ITR 43 (P&H) admitted the additional evidence submitted by the assessee before him. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) obtained remand report dated 17.08.2018 from the Ld. AO on the documentary evidences filed by the assessee. This is reproduced in para 10 of the appellate order. The Ld. CIT(A) called for rejoinder from the assessee on the remand report which the assess…

JCIT, Circle-22(2), New Delhi vs. S R Foils & Tissue P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jcit, Vs S R Foils & Tissue P.Ltd., Circle-22(2), 2Nd Floor, Vardhman Plaza-Ii, New Delhi. J-Block, Community Centre, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027. Pan-Aaacr7410E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.01.2023 Order

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 33(2)Section 53Section 53(1)Section 68

…relied upon various case laws plethora of case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT Vs. Virgin Securities & Credits Pvt.Ltd., [332 lTR 396] and Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs Jind Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. [335 ITR 43]. It is also submitted that the AO has ignored the copy of the paper book alowntih confirmation of the concerned creditors filed during the assessment proceeding. 5.4 I have carefully gone through the finding of the AO, remand report and submission of the appellant. In the remand report the AO has not given any comment on merit of the additional e…

ITO, Gurgaon vs. Smt. Hema Bajaj, Gurgaon

ITA 5883/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

…these cases where request for permission to produce additional evidence is based on bonafide ground and same is not with a view to causing undue delay, the appellate authority is bound to accept the same. In the case of CIT vs. Jind Cooperative Sugar Mills 335 ITR 43 (P & H), the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court held that the spirit of rule 46A is founded on the principle of natural justice which stand fulfilled by the fact that CIT(A) obtained and considered the remand report of the AO before adjudicating the issue before him. Ld. CIT(A) accordingly admitted the additional evidence which were relevant t…