Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 132(4), Section 132, Section 133A, Section 139, Section 147.

Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali

Q: How many judgments cite Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali?

232 judgments on BharatTax cite Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (90 ITR 271), spanning 2010 to 2026.

90 ITR 271Supreme Court of India1973#380 most cited

What is Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali authority for?

The Supreme Court established principles for best judgment assessments, stating that some guesswork is inevitable but the assessment must be bona fide, rational, and free from bias or capriciousness. An appellate authority cannot substitute its judgment for that of the Assessing Officer unless the AO's assessment is shown to be biased, irrational, vindictive, or capricious, especially when the assessee fails to provide proper accounts or counter-evidence.

232

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali · best judgment assessment · rejection of books of account · Section 144 Income Tax Act · Section 145(3) Income Tax Act · appellate authority power · substitution of AO's judgment · rational basis assessment · estimation of income · assessee non-compliance · arbitrary or capricious assessment · bona fide estimate

Also reported as

32 STC 77

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 132(4)Section 132 Section 133A Section 139 Section 147 Section 144 Section 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 132(3)section 13(1)(c)section 131(1)section 13(1)section 132(4a)dumb documents section 153a(1)(b)best judgment assessment loose papers retracted statement rejection of books of account section 250(4)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali

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)

…&H)(HC) / [2012] 340 ITR 173 (Punjab & Haryana)(HC)-This decision is not applicable as there was corroborative material and also it does not pertain to estimation of another assessment year. b)CST vs. H.M. Esufali H M Abdulai (1973) SCC (2) 137 (SC) / [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC)-The issue was relating to estimation for same year and not other Assessment Years. Hence, this decision is not applicable. c)Gopal Lal Bhadruka vs. DCIT (2012) 346 ITR 106 (AP)(HC)-The issue decided by said decision was on material found post search in case of person searched which is not the issue in the present case. M/s. Matrix India Ente…

Shri Prince Rai, Damoh vs. Income Tax Officer, Damoh

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

ITA 145/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year : 2009-10 Prince Rai, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward - Damoh Damoh (M.P.) (M.P.) [Pan: Ahlpr 7469N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. H.S. Modh, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Swati Agarwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2021

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…id that he has disposed the assessee’s appeal on merits, much less by taking into account all the materials and explanations available on record, which would include that presented in the assessment proceedings. 3.2 In CIT v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC), the decision relied upon by the ld. CIT(A), it was clarified that an appellate authority cannot substitute his own judgment in place of that of the AO unless it is shown that the judgment of the AO was biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious. The said case, even as pointed out by Sh. Modh, was a case of a best judgment assessment, so th…

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)

…kindly delete addition made merely on the basis of third party evidences which are purely conjectures and estimates. Ld Special Counsel relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in case of Comm. Of Sales Tax Vs. H M Esufali H M/s. Nish Developers M Abdulali (90 ITR 271)(SC) on the issue of extrapolation. In this regard Ld AR submitted that in the above case documentary evidences found from the premises of assessee wherein unrecorded sales data of few days was recorded based on which AO made best judgement assessment by estimating sales for the remaining period. In this case there was no such record found from th…

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)

M/S. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11(5) Presently Circle 4(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 282/BANG/2017[2002 - 2003]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…on reassessment. With this proposition there cannot be any quarrel and this aspect is already covered in Deputy CCT v. H. R. Sri Ramulu [1977] 39 STC 177 (SC), V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/EPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC) and CST v. H. M. Esufali H. M. Abdulali [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC). 27. In Hind Wire Industries Ltd. (supra) the Supreme Court has used word "including" in the amended or rectified order would mean that word "order" as the case may be can be either "original order" or "amended order" or "rectified order" depending upon the fact as to in which order the assessee is seeking rectification. To read it as if, onc…

ACIT Cir. 1, Kalyan vs. Kaka Rayon, Bhiwandi

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5365/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. B.P. Purohit, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil Deshpande, DR

Section 143(3)

…ower side, hence the same is liable to be re-estimated by rejecting the accounts. In this regard, I would like to place my reliance on the ratio laid down by the following courts - it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H M Esufali H M Abdulla 90 ITR 271 (SC) that if the estimation made by the Assessing Authority is a bond fide estimate and based on a rationable basis, the fact that there is no good proof in support of that estimate is immaterial. Apex court has further held in the case of M/s. Kanchwala Gems Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC) that it is well settled that in a best judgment assess…

Pooja Seva Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 890/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 890/Jp/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pooja Seva Shiksha Samiti, Cuke A.C.I.T.(Exemptions) Vs. Old Add:- B-22, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Jaipur. Nagar, Jaipur. New Add:- Ip Phase Iv, Opp. Choki Dhani, Sitapura, Jaipur. Pan No.: Aaatp 8689 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddartha Ranka (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 13/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement :22/10/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 29/08/2017 For The A.Y. 2012-13. The Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee In The Appeal Reads As Under: “1. That In The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Lower Authorities Has Grossly Erred In Not Allowing The Claim Of Depreciation Amounting To Rs. 1,09,21,449/- As An Application Of Income.” 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

For Appellant: Shri Siddartha Ranka (Advs.)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)

…re the ld. CIT(A) and also failed to offer any explanation in respect or ground raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the ld. CIT(A) while relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4 ITA 890/JP/2018_ Pooja Seva Shiksha Samiti Vs ACIT(E) 8. Now before us, although, the assessee had tried to support ground raised by it by relying upon the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT Jaipur Benches in the case of M/s Zeen-Zar Charitable Foundation Trust Hospital and Research Cent…

Shri Sumit Goyal C/O Shri Ram Lakhan Goyal Mohalla Thateron Ka, Shrimadhopur, Dist-Sikar C/O- S.L. Poddar & Company E-3A, Kanti Chandra Road, Bani Park, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Circle-6, Neema Ka Thana, Circle-6

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

ITA 295/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nces were produced by him despite adequate opportunity having been provided. 3 ITA 295/JP/2019_ Shri Sumit Goyal Vs ITO In this connection, reliance may be placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble supreme court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Hon'ble court has held that he appellate authority cannot substitute its own judgment in place of the judgment of the A.O. unless it is shown that the judgment of the A.O. was biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious. In the instant case the appellant has not able to show that the decision of the A.O. was arbitrary, biased, irratio…

JCIT(OSD), Circle- 16(2), New Delhi vs. Max Medical Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4711/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.4711 & 8340/Del/2018 अपील िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit, Circle-16(2), Room No.308, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110002 Vs Max Medical Services Ltd. 1, Dr. Jha Marg, Okhla, Phase-Iii, New Delhi-110020 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aadcm3619D आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1819 & 5477/Del/2017 अपील िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit, Circle-16(2), Room No.308, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110002 Vs Max Medical Services Ltd. 1, Dr. Jha Marg, Okhla, Phase-Iii, New Delhi-110020 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aadcm3619D अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sh. Atul Ninawat, C.A. Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Atul Ninawat, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)

…fact that the estimate made by the AO was not arbitrary but was based on credible material and by disregarding the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, MP vs. HM Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2015-16 Esufali HM Abdulai (1973) 90 ITR 271? 4. Whether in facts and on circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in holding the decision arrival at in one assessment year by his predecessor is binding on him by ignoring that the principle of Estoppels (i.e. decision arrived at in one assessment year is not binding in subsequent assessment years) has no application to t…

Shri Vinod Kumar Kothari, Tonk vs. ITO, Ward, Tonk

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

ITA 1381/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Him, The Appellant Had Attended His Office On All These Days & Sought To Submit The Written Reply On The Given Dates. Finally The Reply Could Be Submitted On 10.4.2019, As The Same Was Not Received By The Ld. Cit On Earlier Dates Due To Paucity Of Time. In The Circumstances The Ld. Cit (A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Summarily Without Going Into The Merits Of The Case As 2

For Appellant: Shri K.L. Moolchandani (CA)For Respondent: Ms Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Section 145(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ’B’, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh- 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa h Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1381/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15. cuke Shri Vinod Kumar Kothari The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 02, Industrial Area, Malpura, Ward Tonk. Tonk. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. ACRPK 8599 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri K.L. Moolchandani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms Chanch…

M/S Ananda Social & Educational Trust, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2542/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri P.K.Gadale

For Appellant: Smt Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT

Section 11Section 12ASection 153A

…. He also took the view that the extrapolation is permitted in the Income tax proceedings on the basis of available materials. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision rendered in the following cases:- (a) CST vs. H.M. Eusufali, H.M. Abdulali (1973)(90 ITR 271)(SC) (b) Gopal lal Bhadruka vs. DCIT (346 ITR 106)(AP) (c) Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centres (48 Taxmann.com 347)(Kerala) The AO also observed that there was material available for AY 2009-10 and AY 2014-15, which disclosed that the assessee is suppressing fee receipts. The assessee has also been suppressing fee collections made for giving…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 6168/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/o 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABVPN3963B CO No. 09/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Vs Income Tax Officer, R/o 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, Ward-49(3), Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABVPN3963B Assessee by : Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CA Revenue by : Sh. Saras Ku…

Bureau for Partnerships in Rajasthan Society, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 338/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 338/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2017-18 Cuke Bureau For Partnership In Rajasthan The Acit (Cpc Tds) Vs. Society, B-Block, Aayakar Bhawan, Sector-3, Yojana Bhawan, Vaishali,Ghaziabad (U.P.) Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aactb 5302 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vishal Gupta, Ca Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena, Jcit-Dr Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 19/02/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 20/02/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) -3, Jaipur Dated 15-01-2019 Arising From The Order Of Levy Of Fees Passed U/S 200A R.W.S. 234E Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds. ‘’1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Grossly Erred In Law & Facts By Confirming The Late

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, JCIT-DR

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

…sed in this appeal nor any supporting evidences were produced by him despite adequate opportunity having been provided. In this connection, reliance may be placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Hon'ble Court has held that the appellate authority cannot substitute its own judgement in place of the judgement of the AO unless it is show that the judgement of the AO was biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious. In the instant case, the appellant has not able to show that the decision of the AO was arbitrary, biased, irration…

Shri Chandra Prakash, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7-2, Jaipur

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

ITA 1246/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Chanchal Meena (JCIT)

Section 144Section 145(3)

…ised in this appeal nor any supporting evidences were produced by him despite adequate opportunity having been provided. In this connection, reliance may be placed upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that the appellate authority cannot substitute its own judgment in place of the judgment of the A.O. unless it is shown that the judgment of the AO was biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious. In the instant case the appellant has not able to show that the decision of the A.O. was arbitrary, biased, irration…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Earthline Apparels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1456/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1456/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Earthline Apparels Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-8(1), 2168, Gurudwara Road, Karol New Delhi Bagh, Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabce4236G Assessee By : Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, Fca Revenue By : Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2019

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

…rels Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. AO has failed to consider our aforesaid submission submitted before him vide our letter dated 27.01.2015 vide para no 4 and 6 & dated 16.03.201.5 vide para no 3. I. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of CST Vs Esufali (1973) 90 ITR 271 "that where the assessee has admittedly filed accounts, balance sheet: etc there is no suggestion that the accounts are false or fraudulent, an assessment on best judgement must be based on such accounts. And estimate mode by the assessing officer must be bonafide and on rationale basis." II. It has also been held in the case of Shri Shanker Sug…

M/S Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour, Angamally vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 513/COCH/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

…ogical to hold that in all probabilities assessee functioned in a similar fashion at least during the whole period relevant to this assessment year. The CIT(A) observed that the ratio laid by Apex Court in the case of CST v. H.M. Esufali. H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Apex Court upheld the estimation of undisclosed turnover for the entire period of one year on thebasis of undisclosed sales detected for the period of 19 days was squarely applicable to the assessee for this assessment year. The CIT(A) observed that it can be reasonably presumed that assessee was having undisclosed M/s.Best Bakery & Ic…