DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani

85 ITD 734Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2003#7242 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132(4A)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271AAB(1)(b)Section 69

Issues it is cited on

section 100profit split methodbright line testresale price methodsection 36(l)(va)amp expendituresection 92esection 92(1)cost plus methodfar analysiscorporate guaranteeright to receive

Judgments citing DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani

SHRI DINESH MAN SINGH,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- II, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 587/LKW/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Dinesh Man Singh Dcit Central Circle-Ii V. Shri Kanchan Khanna, 15/45- Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, B, Civil Lines, Kanpur-208001. Allenganj, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Acqpm1819H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vikas Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…ns cannot be made by assessing officer on account of investment in moveable property, source of which was already subjected to tax, even if the addition was made on the basis of statement of assessee recorded by ADI ws 132(4). -Dy. CIT vs, Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734 (Nag). (iii) Decision of Hon'ble (ITAT Jabalpur Bench in the case of ACIT v, Satyapal Wassan (2007) 295 ITR (AT) 352. In the aforesaid case while deciding on presumption and its rebuttal the Hon'ble ITAT held as follows: "That the document was bereft of necessary details about the year of transaction, ownership, nature of transaction, necessary co…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…503 (Cal); xi) R. B. Jessa Ram Fateh Chand vs CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…503 (Cal); xi) R. B. Jessa Ram Fateh Chand vs CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…503 (Cal); xi) R. B. Jessa Ram Fateh Chand vs CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…503 (Cal); xi) R. B. Jessa Ram Fateh Chand vs CIT: 81 ITR 409 (All); xii) CIT vs Enron Expat Services Inc : 327 ITR 626 (Uttkhd); xiii) Smt. Snehlata Jain v. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K); xiv) S.R. Koshti v. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.); xv) DCIT v. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag); xvi) Indo Java & Co. v. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB); and xvii) ITO v. GE Hawn : 2l ITD 553 (All.) 148. Referring to the following decisions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that additional ground on issue of subsidy was raised for the first time before the Tribunal in the following cases and were admitted:- i) Shree Balaji Alloys…

D.C.I.T.,CC-3(3), KOLKATA vs. SHRI LOKNATH PRASAD GUPTA, TITAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 162/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 153ASection 154

…es Association (1998)-vs.- Union of India & Ors [2003] 262 ITR 638 (Cal.); (ii) In Maynak Poddar (HUF) –vs.- Wealth Tax Officer [2003] 262 ITR 633 (Cal.) (iii) CIT –vs.- Bhaskar Mitter (1994) 73 Taxman 437 (Cal.); (iv) DCIT –vs.- Sanmukhdas Wadhwani (2003) 85 ITD 734 (Nag.). 5. The ld. CIT(Appeals) found merit in the contentions raised on behalf of the assessee and allowed the claim of the assessee for deduction of Rs. 12,93,62,086/- on account of interest on excise duty pertaining to earlier years by observing as under:- “Many important legal issues emerged out of submission made by the assessee read with di…

SH. ANIRUDDHA YADAV,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NOIDA

ITA 6768/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2011-12 Aniruddha Yadav, Vs. Acit, Circle-1, P-500, Sector-21, Noida Jalvayu Vihar, Noida (Pan: Acjpy9604M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Janardan Das, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 54F

…s income and Doctrine of Estoppel is not applicable to tax the income, which is otherwise not taxable and in support of this view he relied upon the decision of GKW Ltd. Vs. CIT 92012) 347 ITR 429 (Cal.) at page 438 and Dy. CIT vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani (2003) 85 ITD 734 (Nag.) at page 743. 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and stated that they have passed well reasoned orders, which do not need any interference and needs to be upheld. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the impugned order and the rival submissions, we note that durin…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRADDHA CONSTRUCTIONS & POWER GENERATION PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

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

ITA 461/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.570/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 132Section 132(4)

…wing decisions : (a) DCIT Vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav – ITA Nos. 680 to 682/PUN/2015, ITA No.699/PUN/2015 and CO No.10/PUN/2018, dated 25-04-2018 (b) ACIT Vs. Jayant Hiralal Shah – ITA No.546/PN/2012, dated 25-06- 2013 (c) DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734 (Nagpur Tribunal) (d) Poonawalla Investments and Industries Pvt. Ltd. – ITA No.1685/PUN/2015, dated 18-04-2018 12. After hearing both the sides on this issue and on perusing the orders of the Revenue, we find this issue also stands decided in favour of the assessee by virtue of order of Tribunal in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…or examining the seized material for want of any unattended issues if any that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. In this regard, Ld. DR relied on the decision of Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. 27. After hearing both the parties and on perusing the orders of the Revenue we find the AO has merely relied on the statement given by the assessee and he did not go into the issues that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. On these facts, we find the issue requires remanding to the file of AO for verification of the seized…

SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…or examining the seized material for want of any unattended issues if any that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. In this regard, Ld. DR relied on the decision of Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. 27. After hearing both the parties and on perusing the orders of the Revenue we find the AO has merely relied on the statement given by the assessee and he did not go into the issues that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. On these facts, we find the issue requires remanding to the file of AO for verification of the seized…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…or examining the seized material for want of any unattended issues if any that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. In this regard, Ld. DR relied on the decision of Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. 27. After hearing both the parties and on perusing the orders of the Revenue we find the AO has merely relied on the statement given by the assessee and he did not go into the issues that requires disclosure of additional income of Rs.54 lakhs. On these facts, we find the issue requires remanding to the file of AO for verification of the seized…

PRITI DEVENDRA SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1511/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132Section 153C

…r for the AO for making an assessment even if it has an effect of reduction of return of income and if it is in the interest of administration of justice. He also brought our attention to the Nagpur Bench decision in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. Relying on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs. DCIT and Vice versa in ITA Nos. 985 and 986/PUN/2015 and ITA Nos. 1535 and 1536/PUN/2015, dated 28-11-2017, Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted in favour of taxing the amounts in the correct assessment year even if means having a negativ…

PRITI DEVENDRA SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1510/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132Section 153C

…r for the AO for making an assessment even if it has an effect of reduction of return of income and if it is in the interest of administration of justice. He also brought our attention to the Nagpur Bench decision in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. Relying on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs. DCIT and Vice versa in ITA Nos. 985 and 986/PUN/2015 and ITA Nos. 1535 and 1536/PUN/2015, dated 28-11-2017, Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted in favour of taxing the amounts in the correct assessment year even if means having a negativ…

PRITI DEVENDRA SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1509/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132Section 153C

…r for the AO for making an assessment even if it has an effect of reduction of return of income and if it is in the interest of administration of justice. He also brought our attention to the Nagpur Bench decision in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. Relying on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs. DCIT and Vice versa in ITA Nos. 985 and 986/PUN/2015 and ITA Nos. 1535 and 1536/PUN/2015, dated 28-11-2017, Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted in favour of taxing the amounts in the correct assessment year even if means having a negativ…

PRITI DEVENDRA SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1508/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132Section 153C

…r for the AO for making an assessment even if it has an effect of reduction of return of income and if it is in the interest of administration of justice. He also brought our attention to the Nagpur Bench decision in the case of DCIT Vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani 85 ITD 734. Relying on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. Vs. DCIT and Vice versa in ITA Nos. 985 and 986/PUN/2015 and ITA Nos. 1535 and 1536/PUN/2015, dated 28-11-2017, Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted in favour of taxing the amounts in the correct assessment year even if means having a negativ…

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3688/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…neral Re-Insurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303(Del.) − Abdul Qayume V. CIT: 184 ITR 404 (All.) − Smt Snehlata Jain vs. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K) − S.R. Koshti vs. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) − Ester Industries Ltd. vs. CIT: 316 ITR 260 (Del.) − DCIT vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag) − Jyotsana Holding (P) Ltd. vs. ITO: 37 ITD 430 (Del.) − Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB) 14.15 Further, it is also settled law that the purpose of the assessment is to compute income in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The assessing officer is therefore, even otherwise, duty bound to grant relief, which the assessee…