Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT

309 ITR 259High Court2009#10505 most cited

What is Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT authority for?

Estimates of income are questions of fact. When books of account are rejected, depreciation is not allowed on those rejected accounts, and income is assessed on an estimated net profit rate.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

estimate income fact · rejected books of account · depreciation not allowed · net profit rate estimation · Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries · New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO

Judgments citing Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT

Ashok Kumar, Bhojpur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 259/PAT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 40

…ITA No. 259/PAT/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 259/PAT/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar,……………………………………... Appellant Prop. M/s. Hanuman Trading Co., Jwala Market, Near Shiv Mandir, Piro, Bhojpur, Bihar [PAN: ANTPK7205R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………...Respondent Ward-1, Ara Appearances by: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. D.R., appeared on…

Mahesh Kumar, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Faridabad

Appeal are allowed

ITA 2134/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 2(47)Section 53A

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar, Vs Income-tax Officer, H. No. 352, Near Shiv Mandir, Faridabad. Tilpat, Amar Nagar, Faridabad. PAN- AZHPK1325Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Sh. Vineet Gupta, CA & Sh. Apurv Sharma, CA Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.12.2023 Date of pronouncement 22.12.2023 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)…

M/S Goodwil Traders, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Srinagar

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 30/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &
Section 145(3)

…Court held that “Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT, 1 SCC 673; New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO 309 ITR 259 (HP); and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj.).” Similar view was reiterated by the Allahabad High Court in plethora of cases to name a few CIT Vs Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. 177 ITR 86 (All.) ; CIT Vs Surjit Singh 210 ITR 83 (All.) in which case the order of the Tribunal was upheld where it has applied flat rate of N.P based on past h…

Goodwill Traders, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Srinagar

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 327/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &
Section 145(3)

…Court held that “Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT, 1 SCC 673; New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO 309 ITR 259 (HP); and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj.).” Similar view was reiterated by the Allahabad High Court in plethora of cases to name a few CIT Vs Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. 177 ITR 86 (All.) ; CIT Vs Surjit Singh 210 ITR 83 (All.) in which case the order of the Tribunal was upheld where it has applied flat rate of N.P based on past h…

Goodwill Traders., Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Srinagar

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 326/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &
Section 145(3)

…Court held that “Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT, 1 SCC 673; New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO 309 ITR 259 (HP); and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj.).” Similar view was reiterated by the Allahabad High Court in plethora of cases to name a few CIT Vs Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. 177 ITR 86 (All.) ; CIT Vs Surjit Singh 210 ITR 83 (All.) in which case the order of the Tribunal was upheld where it has applied flat rate of N.P based on past h…

Shree Sudhakar Pandey, Sonbhedra vs. ACIT Range-III, Mirzapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7/ALLD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad15 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Sudhakar Pandey, Civil Line, V Acit, Robertsganj, Sonebhadra, Uttar Pradesh- . Range-Iii, Mirzapur, U.P. 231216 Pan-Alds03711B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/12/2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 44A

…****************** 24. Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner (Custom) vs. Stoneman Marble [(2011) 2 SCC 758], Vijay K. Talwar vs. CIT [(2011) 1 SCC 673]; New Plaza Restaurant vs. ITO [309 ITR 259 (HP)]; and Sanjay Oil Cake vs. CIT [316 ITR 274 (Gujarat)]. 26. In the instant cases, when the books of accounts were rejected, then the assessee is not entitled for the depreciation separately on the same set of books of accounts which have no value after its rejection. Hence, we modify the impugned order passed by the Tribunal pertaining to the…

ACIT Circle-3, Mathura vs. Shobha Ram Sharma Contractor, Mathura

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that

ITA 306/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Sept 2019AY 2012-13
Section 144Section 44

…Court held that “Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT, 1 SCC 673; New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO 309 ITR 259 (HP); and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj.).” Similar view was reiterated by the Jurisdictional High Court in plethora of cases to name a few CIT Vs Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. 177 ITR 86 (All.) ; CIT Vs Surjit Singh 210 ITR 83 (All.) in which case the order of the Tribunal was upheld where it has applied flat rate of N.P based on p…

ACIT Circle-3, Mathura vs. Shobha Ram Sharma Contractor, Mathura

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that

ITA 296/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Sept 2019AY 2012-13
Section 144Section 44

…Court held that “Needless to mention that the estimate is question of fact as per the ratio laid down in the cases of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT, 1 SCC 673; New Plaza Restaurant v. ITO 309 ITR 259 (HP); and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj.).” Similar view was reiterated by the Jurisdictional High Court in plethora of cases to name a few CIT Vs Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. 177 ITR 86 (All.) ; CIT Vs Surjit Singh 210 ITR 83 (All.) in which case the order of the Tribunal was upheld where it has applied flat rate of N.P based on p…

Smt. Savita Goel, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3794/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel Aop, Income Tax Officer, 444, Bhrampuri, Vs. Ward-1(1), Muzaffarnagar (Up). Muzaffarnagar Pan : Aacas 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel, Income Tax Officer, 444, Brahmpuri, Vs. Ward-2(3), Muzaffarnagar (Up). Muzaffarnagar Pan : Aacas 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prem Prakash, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-1”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel AOP, Income Tax Officer, 444, Bhrampuri, Vs. Ward-1(1), Muzaffarnagar (UP). Muzaffarnagar PAN : AACAS 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel, Income Tax Officer, 444, Brahmpuri, Vs. Ward-2(3), Muzaffarnagar (UP). Muzaffarnagar PAN : AACAS 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Prem Prakash, Adv. Shri Ashish Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by : Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 27-10-2016 Date of pronouncement : 01-1…

Savita Goel AOP, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1666/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel Aop, Income Tax Officer, 444, Bhrampuri, Vs. Ward-1(1), Muzaffarnagar (Up). Muzaffarnagar Pan : Aacas 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel, Income Tax Officer, 444, Brahmpuri, Vs. Ward-2(3), Muzaffarnagar (Up). Muzaffarnagar Pan : Aacas 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prem Prakash, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-1”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel AOP, Income Tax Officer, 444, Bhrampuri, Vs. Ward-1(1), Muzaffarnagar (UP). Muzaffarnagar PAN : AACAS 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2009-10 Savita Goel, Income Tax Officer, 444, Brahmpuri, Vs. Ward-2(3), Muzaffarnagar (UP). Muzaffarnagar PAN : AACAS 1442 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Prem Prakash, Adv. Shri Ashish Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by : Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 27-10-2016 Date of pronouncement : 01-1…

Customs (Import) v. Stonemann Marble Industries, 2 SCC 758, Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT (309 ITR 259) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax