What is Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Corroborative evidence is essential to support evidence found on third-party premises, and an assessment cannot be based on suspicion, surmises, or conjecture.

How many judgments cite Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT?

1,061 judgments on BharatTax cite Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (26 ITR 775), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 132, Section 68, Section 153C, Section 153A, Section 132(4).

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (26 ITR 775)

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1064/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhury, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…erefore, the assessment made under section 143(3) raising the gross profit rate abnormally high @ 82% is pure guess work and is based on suspicion. Our view gets support from the Supreme Court decision in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 . In this case the Supreme Court has observed at page 782 as under: ". . . it is equally clear that in making the assessment under sub- section 3 of section 143 of the, Act, the Income-tax Officer is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than…

ITO, Rohtak vs. M/S. Veekay Medicos, Rohtak

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 968/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh.G.D.Agarwal & Smt Diva Singh

Section 194HSection 40

…the basis of surmises, suspicious and conjectures. Reliance for this proposition is placed on 37 ITR 271(SC) Uma Charan Shaw &Bros. Co. v.CIT and other decision 37 ITR 151(SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait v CIT 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT, Bombay, 26 ITR 775 (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills ltd. V CIT, 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT, 91 ITR 8 (SC) CIT v Calcutta Discount Company Ltd." Further, this issue is covered by the this office order for A.Y. 2008-09. In view of the above, the addition is deleted and this ground of appeal is allowed. Regarding the disallowance made by the AO also…

Loha Ispaat Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5231/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anant N.PaiFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…ities below could not point out any specific defect in the expenses claimed so as to main adhoc disallowances. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [(1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC)]. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the disallowance is excessive and it can be reduced to Rs.2 lakh. In view of the above concession given by the learned Counsel, we are of the view that a reasonable disallowance of Rs.2 lakh will meet the ends of justice and hence we delete the balance Rs.2 lakh. This ground is partly allowed…

Jai Hind Paper Mart, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and revenue are dismissed

ITA 6134/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6134 /Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Jai Hind Paper Mart Income Tax Officer 14(2)(3), 3Rd Floor, Earnest House 186, Hiramanek Bldg, बिधम/ Dadiseth Agiary Lane, Nariman Point, Vs. Chira Bazar, Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 002. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./Pan/Gir No. Aaafj3532E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6144 /Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 14(2)(3), M/S. Jai Hind Paper Mart 3Rd Floor, Earnest House 186, Hiramanek Bldg, बिधम/ Nariman Point, Dadiseth Agiary Lane, Vs. Mumbai-400 021. Chira Bazar, Mumbai-400 002. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./Pan/Gir No. Aaafj3532E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Ratan Samul प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri K. Ravi Kiran

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamulFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi Kiran

Section 143(1)Section 148

…4&6144/M/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) M/s. Jai Hind Paper Mart Suspicion, however strong cannot take place of proof. This principle is reflected in the following judicial pronouncements: Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT (37 ITR 271) (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills v. CIT (26 ITR 775) (SC) SheoNarain DuliChand v. CIT (72 ITR 766)(All.) iv) Under the Income the Income Tax Act, 1961 what can be taxed is the real income. Even though the transaction is not verifiable, what is taxable is the income component, and not the entire transaction amount. It is quite possible that the appellant would have made purchases from open market wi…

ACIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Varsha P. Shah, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 4489/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaina C I T - 17(2) Smt. Varsha P. Shah Room No. 217, 2Nd Floor 234/26, 2Nd Floor, Om Niwas 1 Vs. Piramal Chambers, Parel Kartak Road, Wadala Mumbai 400012 Mumbai 400031 Pan - Aaqps4783G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar SoniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjai Parikh

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 44A

…the details field by the appellant by the appellant. It may be appreciated that the Assessing Officer has not rejected the books of accounts of the appellant. (5) The appellant relies on the following decisions. a) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) - the Assessing Officer is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than bare suspicion to support the assessment under section 143(3). 4 Smt. Varsha P. Shah b) Umachanaran Shah & Bros. Vs. C1T (1959) 37 1TR 271 (SC) - As assessment based o…

M/S Scantec (India) Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Uttar Pradesh

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

ITA 2893/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Yogesh K. Jagia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. B. Ramanjaneyula, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)

…IT vs. Allied Leather Finisher Pvt. Ltd. (32) SOT 549 (Lko Bench) (iv). C.B. Gautam vs. UOI, 199 ITR 530 (SC) (v). State of Kerala vs. K.T. Shaduli Yusuf, 39 STC 478 (SC) (vi). Raghuvir Harihar (1957) ZSTC 770(SC) (vii). Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 26 ITR 775. 8. The ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities. 9. After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the ld. AO and CIT(A) has examined in detail the appellant’s submissions, but both of them have failed to examine the bank transactions undertaken by the assessee. Both the authorities below…

ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 432/KOL/2012[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :1998-99 Ito Ward-1(3), Room V/S. M/S Gkw Ltd., Central No. 1A, 4Th Floor, Plaza, 2/6 Sarat Bose Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Road, Office Space No. Chowringhee Suquare, 406, 4Thfloor, Kolkata-20 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No. Aabcg 0671 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145A

…e as NIL. Such an order has been made on the basis of pure guess and bare suspicion without reference to any evidence or material. In this connection, we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) where the Hon’ble court has held that while passing an order, the AO should have disclosed to the assessee the material on which it is going to found its estimate and then afford the assessee full opportunity to meet the substance of any private inquiries made by the AO if it is intended to make the estimate on the foot of those enquiries. Fu…

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 5722/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. Reliance for this proposition is placed on 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT. It has been further held in the following cases that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the place of proof: i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 'As regards the second contention, we are in entire agreement with the learned Solicitor General when he says that the ITO is not fettered by technical rules of evidence and pleadings, and that he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a Court of law, but there…

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 996/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. Reliance for this proposition is placed on 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT. It has been further held in the following cases that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the place of proof: i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 'As regards the second contention, we are in entire agreement with the learned Solicitor General when he says that the ITO is not fettered by technical rules of evidence and pleadings, and that he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a Court of law, but there…

Mayur Valji Bhayaani, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 7079/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7079/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Mayur Valji Bhayaani Income Tax Officer-22(1)(3), Tower No.6, 4Th Floor, Vashi 7, Samta Co-O. Housing Society, बनाम/ N.P. Road, Asalpha Village, Railway Station Complex, Vashi, Vs. Ghatkopar (West), Navi Mumbai-400 703. Mumbai-400 086. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Athpb 9503B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Assesseeby : Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Neil Philip

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ke an assessment without reference to 7 Shri Mayur Valji Bhayaani vs. ITO evidence or any material placed on record. There must be something more than bare suspicion to support the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act (Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Limited V / s. CIT 26 ITR 775, 782 - SC). In other words, the assessment of any particular year must not be based on mere suspicion or bare guess work but on legitimate material from which reasonable inference of the income having been earned during the accounting year could be drawn. 11. On over all consideration of entire materials placed on record, it would be reasonable t…

M/S. Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is party allowed

ITA 5696/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiiveco Spa, Adit, Copia Corporate Suite, Circle-1(2), Plot No.9, Jasola District Vs. International Taxation, Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent) Iveco Spa, Adit, (Now Fiat Gestione Partecipazioni Circle-1(2), Spa), Vs. International Taxation, 301-304, Plot No.9, Copia Corporate New Delhi Suites, Jasola, Dist Center, New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 271(1)

…to the rejoinder submission dated 05.09.2014 and 08.09.2014 may also be considered. Over and above this, he further relied on 13 decisions of various courts as under:- Sr. Particulars No. CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxmann 482 1. (Del) i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswai Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 2. ii) 37 ITR 151 (SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait Vs. CIT iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs. CIT, Bombay iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT v) AIR 1977 SC 796 Krishnand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh vi) Air 1974 SC 171 Jayadayal Poddar Vs. mst Bibi hazra vii) 242 ITR…

Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is party allowed

ITA 5447/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiiveco Spa, Adit, Copia Corporate Suite, Circle-1(2), Plot No.9, Jasola District Vs. International Taxation, Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent) Iveco Spa, Adit, (Now Fiat Gestione Partecipazioni Circle-1(2), Spa), Vs. International Taxation, 301-304, Plot No.9, Copia Corporate New Delhi Suites, Jasola, Dist Center, New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 271(1)

…to the rejoinder submission dated 05.09.2014 and 08.09.2014 may also be considered. Over and above this, he further relied on 13 decisions of various courts as under:- Sr. Particulars No. CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxmann 482 1. (Del) i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswai Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 2. ii) 37 ITR 151 (SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait Vs. CIT iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs. CIT, Bombay iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT v) AIR 1977 SC 796 Krishnand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh vi) Air 1974 SC 171 Jayadayal Poddar Vs. mst Bibi hazra vii) 242 ITR…

ITO 14(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Takhtmal Bhuralal Pichholiya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4526/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 The Ito-14(1)(3), Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal बनाम/ Earnest House, Pichholiya, Vs. Nariman Point, (Prop. Metal Agencies), Mumbai-400 021 Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002 C.O. Nos. 212 To 214/Mum/2015 (Arising Out Of I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal The Ito-14(1)(3), बनाम/ Pichholiya, Earnest House, Vs. (Prop. Metal Agencies), Nariman Point, Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai-400 021 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya

Section 143(3)

…ot make any addition just on the basis of presumption. Suspicion, however strong cannot take place of proof. This principle is reflected in the following Judicial pronouncements: Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT (37 ITR 271) (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills v. CIT (26 ITR 775) (SC) SheoNarain DuliChand v. CIT (72 ITR 766)(AIl.) The appearance of a purchase party on the website of Sales Tax Department may raise a question mark; however the allowance of purchase expenses has to be necessarily decided taking into view the totality of the circumstances of appellant’s claim. Hence, I am of the opinion that the opinion that…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Minda Investment Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the

ITA 4391/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 68

…t even by private enquiry. But if he desires to use the materials so collected, the assessee must be informed of the materials and must be given an adequate opportunity of explaining it. Similar view was expressed in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC). Reliance is also placed on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court i.e. Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta and Vijay Gupta(2008) 303 ITR 95(Delhi) wherein it was held that reopening of assessment is not permissible on mere adverse statements from others. Such statement by itself does not constitute i…

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2033/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…e loss was booked by restating the foreign debtors in view in the fall in the exchange rate as per the existing accounting standard -11. They relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakcshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 26 ITR 775. Further, in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. reported in 116 ITR 1 and also in the case of Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 312 ITR 254 (SC). In view of facts and circumstances of the case and also the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court, appeal on this issue is allowed.” 6.2. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on…

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Price Water House Coopers Pvt., Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1523/KOL/2013[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…e loss was booked by restating the foreign debtors in view in the fall in the exchange rate as per the existing accounting standard -11. They relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakcshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 26 ITR 775. Further, in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. reported in 116 ITR 1 and also in the case of Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 312 ITR 254 (SC). In view of facts and circumstances of the case and also the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court, appeal on this issue is allowed.” 6.2. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on…

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt, Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1521/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…e loss was booked by restating the foreign debtors in view in the fall in the exchange rate as per the existing accounting standard -11. They relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakcshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 26 ITR 775. Further, in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. reported in 116 ITR 1 and also in the case of Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 312 ITR 254 (SC). In view of facts and circumstances of the case and also the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court, appeal on this issue is allowed.” 6.2. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on…

M/S Radhashyam Tirthabashi Paul, Kolkata vs. Addl.C.I.T RG - 50, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1226/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed & Shris.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 80G

…us. 14. Before us L’d AR reiterated same submissions as made before L’d CIT(A) and stated that disallowance on estimated basis is not permissible in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1954) reported in 26 ITR 775 (SC) ITA No.1226/Kol/2013 A.Y.2008-09 M/s Radhashyam T Paul v. ACIT Rng-50, Kol. Page 9 On the other hand, L’d DR vehemently relied on the orders of Authorities Below. 15. We have heard rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. From the foregoing discussion, we find that assessee has claimed home bidi makers for an amount…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Ltd

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/912/2008HC Karnataka07 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…pellate Commissioner deleted the allocation of expenses made by the Assessing Officer based on the order of ITAT in the very same assessee’s case reported in 81 TTJ 455 and the decision of the Apex Court in Indo Nipan 7 Limited’s case (261 ITR 775). It is noticed that over 5.6% of the sales is made through franchises, however, the assessee adopted sales as basis for allocation. The sale made through the franchises stands on a different footing than the sale made directly by the assessee company. In the case of sale made through franchise, no effort is involved by the assessee ex…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Ltd

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/890/2008HC Karnataka07 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…pellate Commissioner deleted the allocation of expenses made by the Assessing Officer based on the order of ITAT in the very same assessee’s case reported in 81 TTJ 455 and the decision of the Apex Court in Indo Nipan 7 Limited’s case (261 ITR 775). It is noticed that over 5.6% of the sales is made through franchises, however, the assessee adopted sales as basis for allocation. The sale made through the franchises stands on a different footing than the sale made directly by the assessee company. In the case of sale made through franchise, no effort is involved by the assessee ex…

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

What is Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITO, Rohtak vs. M/S. Veekay Medicos, Rohtak

Loha Ispaat Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

Jai Hind Paper Mart, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(2)(3), Mumbai

ACIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Varsha P. Shah, Mumbai

M/S Scantec (India) Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Uttar Pradesh

ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Mayur Valji Bhayaani, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

M/S. Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

ITO 14(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Takhtmal Bhuralal Pichholiya, Mumbai

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Minda Investment Ltd., Delhi

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Price Water House Coopers Pvt., Kolkata

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt, Kolkata

M/S Radhashyam Tirthabashi Paul, Kolkata vs. Addl.C.I.T RG - 50, Kolkata

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Ltd

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Ltd