DCIT v. Panna Corporation

74 DTR 89High Court2012#1691 most cited

What is DCIT v. Panna Corporation authority for?

When unaccounted cash or on-money receipts are detected, only the profit element embedded in such receipts is taxable, not the entire gross amount, and this profit requires estimation.

67

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. Panna Corporation · Panna Corporation · 74 DTR 89 · on-money receipt · unaccounted cash receipt · profit embedded · estimation of profit · section 145(3) · rejection of books · business income.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 145(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

on money receiptsection 145(2)project completion methodsection 256(1)section 199rejection of books of accountsection 256on-moneyspecified authorityicdssection 145(3)loose papers

Judgments citing DCIT v. Panna Corporation

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Mumbai vs. Avinash Construction, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 4245/MUM/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Avinash Construction, Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Abil House 2, Old Cgo Annexe Building, Vs. Ganesh Khind Road, M.K.Road, Range Hill Corner, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411007. Pan : Aaefa6358H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69C

…and unaccounted expenditure noted in seized/ impounded documents which are not recorded in the books of accounts. In support of the facts, the appellant submitted certain decisions of judicial authorities in the following cases: i. DCIT v. Panna Corporation [74 DTR 89 (Guj)): ii. CIT v. Babulal Daga [387 ITR 114 (Guj) iii. CIT v. President Industries [258 ITR 654 (Guj) iv. Pr. CIT Vs Mehul T. Desai (2019 TaxPub(DT) 5219 (Guj-HC) v. Greenfield Realty Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT IT (SS) A No. 289 292/Ahmedabad/2018] vi. Dhanvarsha Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT [102 ITD 375 (Pune) vii. Parthivi Constructions Pvt.…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

ITA 2982/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

…s. Anupam Organiser (2020) (9) TMI 973 Organiser (2020) (9) TMI 973. In its said order the Hon Hon’ble High Court relying on its earlier order passed in the case of relying on its earlier order passed in the case of DCIT vs Panna DCIT vs Panna Corporation (74 DTR 89) Corporation (74 DTR 89), had observed, that the Tribunal was justified , had observed, that the Tribunal was justified in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount for the purpose…

DCIT-CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Rubberwala Realty, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to

ITA 3531/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: We Advert To The Grounds Taken In The Cross Appeals, It Would First Be Relevant To Cull Out The Basic Facts Of The Case & Effect Of Law In Brief In Respect Of Certain Ays. Search U/S 132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Was Conducted Against The Rubberwala Group, On 17-03-2021 Thereby Triggering Section 153A Of The Act. Prior To The Date Of Search, The Income-Tax Assessments For Ays 2015-16 To 2019-20 Were Either Completed U/S 143(1)/143(3) Of The Act And/Or The Time Limit For Issue Of Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Had Expired. Accordingly, The Income-Tax 3

For Respondent: Shri Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…that a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT, Surat Vs. Anupam Organiser (2020) (9) TMI 973. In its said order the Hon'ble High Court relying on its earlier order passed in the case of DCIT vs Panna Corporation (74 DTR 89), had observed, that 52 ITA No.3443 & Ors/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2015-16 to 2021-22 Rubberwala Realty the Tribunal was justified in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount for the purpose of receiving the amount of on-monies and thus, what could be brought to tax was the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receip…

DCIT-CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed and

ITA 3508/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3448/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3447/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3446/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3445/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3444/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3432/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Ground Floor, Rubberwala House, Dr. A Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. बनाम / Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3508/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3505/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3504/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3549/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3503/Mum/2023

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain FCAFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…that a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT, Surat Vs. Anupam Organiser (2020) (9) TMI 973. In its said order the Hon'ble High Court relying on its earlier order passed in the case of DCIT vs Panna Corporation (74 DTR 89), had observed, that the Tribunal was justified in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount for the purpose of receiving the amount of on- monies and thus, what could be brought to tax was the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receipts. Similar view is noted to have been expressed by the Hon'ble High Cou…

Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed and

ITA 3448/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3448/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3447/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3446/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3445/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3444/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3432/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Ground Floor, Rubberwala House, Dr. A Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. बनाम / Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3508/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3505/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3504/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3549/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3503/Mum/2023 2

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain FCAFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpa
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

…that a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT, Surat Vs. Anupam Organiser (2020) (9) TMI 973. In its said order the Hon'ble High Court relying on its earlier order passed in the case of DCIT vs Panna Corporation (74 DTR 89), had observed, that the Tribunal was justified in considering that the assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount for the purpose of receiving the amount of on- monies and thus, what could be brought to tax was the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receipts. Similar view is noted to have been expressed by the Hon'ble High Cou…

JCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1559/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Grasim Industries Limited, The Dcit Cc-1(4), Corporate Finance Division, Room No. 902, 9Th Floor, Old Vs. A-2, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. Cgo Building, M.K. Road, Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400030. Pan No. Aaacg 4464 B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jcit (Osd), Central Circle- Grasim Industries Limited, 1(4), A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, Aditya Room No. 902, Pratishtha Vs. Birla Centre, S.K. Ahire Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Marg, Worli, Building Annexe, Mumbai-400030. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacg 4464 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh Thar & Mr. Chaitanya Joshi Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2024 : Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2024

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Grasim Industries Limited, The DCIT CC-1(4), Corporate Finance Division, Room No. 902, 9th floor, Old Vs. A-2, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. CGO Building, M.K. Road, Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400030. PAN No. AAACG 4464 B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 JCIT (OSD), Central Circle- Grasim Industries Limited, 1(4), A-Wing, 2nd floor, Aditya Room No. 902, Pratishtha Vs. Birla Centre, S.K. Ahire Bhavan, 9th floor, Old…

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas

ITA 1055/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…Grasim Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 1055 & 1559/Mum/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 1055/MUM/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Grasim Industries Limited, Corporate Finance Division, A-2, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400030. Vs. The DCIT CC-1(4), Room No. 902, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACG 4464 В Appellant Respondent ITA No. 1559/MUM/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 JCIT (OSD), Central Circle- 1(4), Vs. Grasim Industries Limited,…

M/S Anuradha Properties & Townships Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. The Addl.CIT, Range-1, Hyderabad

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1644/HYD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

…ng that the unaccounted receipts are allowed set off against unaccounted payments and therefore the difference is profit and further erred in holding that the case is distinguishable from the case decided by Gujarat High Court in Panna Corporation reported in 74 DTR 89 (2012) instead of directing to assess only a percentage of unaccounted receipts as income. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 10. Grounds of appeal No.1 and 6 being general in nature are dismissed. The ld.counsel for the assessee did not press the ground of appeal No.2, for which the ld.DR has no objection. Accordingly, t…

M/S Anuradha Properties & Townships Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. The Addl.CIT, Range-1, Hyderabad

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1643/HYD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

…ng that the unaccounted receipts are allowed set off against unaccounted payments and therefore the difference is profit and further erred in holding that the case is distinguishable from the case decided by Gujarat High Court in Panna Corporation reported in 74 DTR 89 (2012) instead of directing to assess only a percentage of unaccounted receipts as income. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 10. Grounds of appeal No.1 and 6 being general in nature are dismissed. The ld.counsel for the assessee did not press the ground of appeal No.2, for which the ld.DR has no objection. Accordingly, t…

M/S Anuradha Properties & Townships Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. The Addl.CIT, Range-1, Hyderabad

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1642/HYD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

…ng that the unaccounted receipts are allowed set off against unaccounted payments and therefore the difference is profit and further erred in holding that the case is distinguishable from the case decided by Gujarat High Court in Panna Corporation reported in 74 DTR 89 (2012) instead of directing to assess only a percentage of unaccounted receipts as income. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 10. Grounds of appeal No.1 and 6 being general in nature are dismissed. The ld.counsel for the assessee did not press the ground of appeal No.2, for which the ld.DR has no objection. Accordingly, t…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1970/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1020/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1167/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…state business and net income from gross receipt in the real- estate business can be fairly estimated at 8% of the gross profit. To support its submission, the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in DCIT Vs Panna Corporation (2012) 74 DTR 89 (GUJ) and CIT Vs Sharda Real Estate P. Ltd., (2104) 99 DTR 488 (GUJ). 16. On the basis of above mentioned submission, the assessee prayed that the AO be directed to make a fair estimation of income component as per the provision of Income tax Act and also @8% of the alleged unaccounted on money receipt, so as to tax only the income and not the gros…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1166/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…state business and net income from gross receipt in the real- estate business can be fairly estimated at 8% of the gross profit. To support its submission, the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in DCIT Vs Panna Corporation (2012) 74 DTR 89 (GUJ) and CIT Vs Sharda Real Estate P. Ltd., (2104) 99 DTR 488 (GUJ). 16. On the basis of above mentioned submission, the assessee prayed that the AO be directed to make a fair estimation of income component as per the provision of Income tax Act and also @8% of the alleged unaccounted on money receipt, so as to tax only the income and not the gros…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Raj Enterprises, Surat

ITA 1164/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…state business and net income from gross receipt in the real- estate business can be fairly estimated at 8% of the gross profit. To support its submission, the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in DCIT Vs Panna Corporation (2012) 74 DTR 89 (GUJ) and CIT Vs Sharda Real Estate P. Ltd., (2104) 99 DTR 488 (GUJ). 16. On the basis of above mentioned submission, the assessee prayed that the AO be directed to make a fair estimation of income component as per the provision of Income tax Act and also @8% of the alleged unaccounted on money receipt, so as to tax only the income and not the gros…

DCIT, Central Cirlcle 1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Saudela Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5058/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta,, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.5058, 5059, 5060 & 5061/M/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2013-14 DCIT, M/s. Saudela Central Circle-1(2), Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 906, 9th Floor, 514, Dalamal Chambers, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. 211, Old CGO Bldg. (Annexe), F.P.J. Marg, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AALCS 0443D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta,, A.R. Revenue by : Shri T. Kipgen, D.R. Date of Hearing :…

Rachakatla Yadagiri, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 671/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1883/Hyd/17 2009-10 Rachakatla Yadagiri, Income Tax Officer, 1884/Hyd/17 2010-11 Hyderabad Ward-15(2), 1885/Hyd/17 2012-13 [PAN: AFAPR6584B] Hyderabad 1886/Hyd/17 2013-14 1887/Hyd/17 2014-15 671/Hyd/18 2015-16 For Assessee : Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, AR For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 19-01-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03-02-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : These six assessee’s…

Rachakattla Yadagiri, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1887/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1883/Hyd/17 2009-10 Rachakatla Yadagiri, Income Tax Officer, 1884/Hyd/17 2010-11 Hyderabad Ward-15(2), 1885/Hyd/17 2012-13 [PAN: AFAPR6584B] Hyderabad 1886/Hyd/17 2013-14 1887/Hyd/17 2014-15 671/Hyd/18 2015-16 For Assessee : Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, AR For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 19-01-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03-02-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : These six assessee’s…

Rachakattla Yadagiri, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1886/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1883/Hyd/17 2009-10 Rachakatla Yadagiri, Income Tax Officer, 1884/Hyd/17 2010-11 Hyderabad Ward-15(2), 1885/Hyd/17 2012-13 [PAN: AFAPR6584B] Hyderabad 1886/Hyd/17 2013-14 1887/Hyd/17 2014-15 671/Hyd/18 2015-16 For Assessee : Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, AR For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 19-01-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03-02-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : These six assessee’s…

Rachakattla Yadagiri, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1885/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1883/Hyd/17 2009-10 Rachakatla Yadagiri, Income Tax Officer, 1884/Hyd/17 2010-11 Hyderabad Ward-15(2), 1885/Hyd/17 2012-13 [PAN: AFAPR6584B] Hyderabad 1886/Hyd/17 2013-14 1887/Hyd/17 2014-15 671/Hyd/18 2015-16 For Assessee : Shri B.Shanthi Kumar, AR For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 19-01-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03-02-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : These six assessee’s…