Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

27 ITR 126Supreme Court of India1955#1446 most cited

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

The Assessing Officer is not bound by the technical rules of evidence and pleadings and is entitled to act on material that may not be admissible as evidence in a court of law during assessment proceedings.

79

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT · 27 ITR 126 · Assessing Officer powers · technical rules of evidence · assessment proceedings · material for assessment · evidence admissibility · Section 143(3) · Section 147 · Section 153A

Also reported as

1 SCR 941

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 153CSection 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 147Section 132Section 148Section 143(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

voluntary admissionsection 158bb(1)penalty under section 271eon money receiptsection 115beconstruction pesection 158bbsection 158b(b)joint development agreementthird party informationretraction of statementpenalty under section 271d

Judgments citing Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, W-1, Vijayanagar vs. Ramachandra Setty and Sons, Hassan

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1163 to 1165/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.1166/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.…

Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Hassan, Hassan vs. Ramachandra Setty and Songs, Hassan

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1163 to 1165/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.1166/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.…

Income Tax Officer, W-1, Hassan vs. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1163/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1163 to 1165/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.1166/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.…

M/S. S. Ramashandra Setty & Sons, Hassan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hassan

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1156/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1163 to 1165/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.1166/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Ramachandra Setty & Sons ITO SRS Building Ward-1 BM Road Vs. Hassan Hassan 573 201 PAN NO : AAEFS4881R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA Nos.…

Shivam Builders Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 317/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 317/Ahd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shivam Builders Private Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम Limited Income Tax Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, Rajvi Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Arcade, Nr. Gurukul Drive In Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs0296D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/04/2024 09/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.07.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal:

For Respondent: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 317/Ahd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shivam Builders Private Deputy Commissioner of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम Limited Income Tax Vs. 802, 8th Floor, Rajvi Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Arcade, Nr. Gurukul Drive in Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCS0296D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by :…

Rajat Diwaker Individual, Bhopal vs. I.T.O. 2(2), Bhopal

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

ITA 369/IND/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirajat Diwakar Ito-2(2) B-266, Shahpur Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adqpd9074N Assessee By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.02.2024

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rajat Diwakar ITO-2(2) B-266, Shahpur Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ADQPD9074N Assessee by Shri Vinod Joshi, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement 12.02.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi dated 28.…

Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)Pune, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: i) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 30. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalcha…

ACIT 2(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Thakkr Housing Development Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2135/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 245D(4)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: 1) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 52. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

ACIT 2(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Thakkar Apana Ghar Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2134/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 245D(4)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: 1) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 52. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

ACIT 2(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Thakkar Apna Ghar Nirman Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2133/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 245D(4)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: 1) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 52. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

ACIT 2(3) 1, Mumbai vs. M/S. Thakkar Grih Nirman Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2132/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 245D(4)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: 1) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 52. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

ACIT 2(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Thakkar Housing Developement Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2131/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 245D(4)

…aterial. Reliance can be placed in this regard on the following decisions: 1) Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) ii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) iv) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) v) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) vi) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 52. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF), 352 ITR 629 after referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. Shiv Edibles Ltd., Kota

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 479/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 145(3)

…e proportion between the turnover and the profits remains unaltered [P.(Venkanna v. CIT, (1969) 72 ITR 328, 330 (Mys). Also see, Steelsworth Ltd. V. CIT, (1968) 69 ITR 366 (Assam); Gopinath Naik v. CIT, (1936) 4 ITR 1, 23 (All); CIT v. Kameshwar Singh, (1933) 1 ITR 94, 106 (PC); Diwan Chand v. CIT, (1934) 2 ITR 382 (Lah); Badri Shah Sohan Lal v. CIT, (1936) 4 ITR 387 (Lah); Paras Das Munna Lal v. CIT, (1937) 5 ITR 523 (Lah); CIT v. Abdul Aziz Sahib, (1939) 7 ITR 647 (Mad); Ganeshi Lal Chhappan Lal v. CIT, (1941) 9 ITR 81 (All)]. 11. In the instant case, it was submitted that it cannot be denied that the assessee…

Smt. Swapna Manna, Purba Medinipur vs. Pr.CIT-9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1072/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…nnot amount to be material and there must be a clear finding before the ITO could apply provisions of the proviso to Section 13. The Court cannot 'leap in the dark' as was held by the Privy Council in CIT v. Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC).” (emphasis given by us) 13. In the instant case, on hand, the assessee is running the business of petrol pump and she has increased the turnover from Rs. 9.84 cr. to Rs. 15.03 crores which is substantial increase in business turnover. In order to attract more customers to her petrol/diesel pump it was told to us that the assessee had given inc…

ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi vs. Direct Mercantile Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5221/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

…Pvt. Ltd etc, ITA No. 71 of 2015 dated 12th August, 2015(Del). " Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT Bihar and Orissa (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) " Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment in Dhadeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 126 (SC) 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. From Page 108 to 110 of the paper book, it can be seen that Alfa Associates and Ram Rahim, these two entities confirmations were not mentioning any details thereof. In-fact, the CIT(A) has not taken properly sufficient evidences on account and simpli…

ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Grandiose Jewellery P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील िं./ Ita No.1413/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer M/S Grandiose Jewellery Pvt. Ward-2(1)(4), R.No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd., 402-B, 4Th Floor, Glitz बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mall 99, Vithalwadi, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-02 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaagca5371D अपीलार्थी की ओर े/ Appellant By Shri Rahul Raman, Cit Dr : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े/ Respondent By : Shri Prakash Jotwani, Ar ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2020 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03.02.2020

For Respondent: Shri Prakash Jotwani, AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “B” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल, लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील िं./ ITA No.1413/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer M/s Grandiose Jewellery Pvt. Ward-2(1)(4), R.No.553, 5th Floor, Ltd., 402-B, 4th Floor, Glitz बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mall 99, Vithalwadi, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-02 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAAGCA5371D अपीलार्थी की ओ…

Partha Chatterjee, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Hooghly

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1015/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2009-10 Partha Chatterjee Acit, Circle-1, Hg बनाम C/O S.N.Ghosh & Aaykar Bhawan, G.T. / Associates, Advocates’ V/S. Road, Khadina More,P.O. “Seven Brotherrs’ Lodge” Chinsurah, P.S.Chinsurah, P.O.Buroshibtala, Dist. Hooghly, Pin-712101 P.S.Chinsurah, Dist.Hooghly, Pin-712105 [Pan No.Acepc 8818 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Altaf Husain, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 19-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 17-01-2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2009-10 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata’S Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed In Case No.360/Cit(A)-6/Kol/2014-15, Involving Proceedings 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File(S) Perused. 2. The Assessee’ Pleadings Raised In The Instant Case Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing / Adding Cost Of Construction Amounting To ₹27,88,995/- In Exercise Of Their Rectification Jurisdiction Vested U/S. 154 Of The Act. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Under:-

Section 143(3)Section 154

…lly incurred by the appellant. Therefore, his action was born of unilateral surmise, suspicion and conjecture not amenable to reason and having no relevance to facts. It is settled in the case of C.I.T. - vs- MAHARAJADHIRAJA KAMESWAR SINGH OF DARBHANGA (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC) that an assessment is not a leap in the dark. The AO is not entitled to make a guess without evidence. It is also settled in the case of DHAKESWARI COTTON MILLS LTD. - VS- C.I. T. (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) that an assessment which is based on conjecture, suspicion and surmise is invalid and unsustainable in law. In the present context, it is submi…

The ACIT Cen Cir-13, Mumbai vs. Shri Suresh V. Jain, Mumbai

Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5091/MUM/2007[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5091/Mum/2007 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri L. K. S. DehiyaFor Respondent: ShriRajiv Khandelwal
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…n f) GopiNathAgarwala v. CIT (1955) 28 ITR 753 (All) g) United Patel Construction Co. v. CIT (1966) 59 ITR 424 (MP). h) CIT v. R. Y. Durlabhji (1995) 211 ITR 178 (Raj.) i) BanshidharOnkarmall v. CIT (1953) 23 ITR 353 (Orissa). j) CIT v. Kameshwar Singh (1933) 1 ITR 94. k) Seth NathuramMunnalal v. CIT 25 ITR 216 (Nag.) In the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v/s. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC) the H'ble Supreme Court held that the Assessing Officer is not entitled to make pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be more than bare suspicion to support the asse…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Suncity Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5740/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, JM ITA No. 5740/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 DCIT, Vs M/s Suncity Projects Pvt. Ltd., N-49, 1st Floor, Connaught Place, Central Circle-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCS8906K Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashok Agarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 23.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 12.07.2018 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 02.08.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-III, New Delhi. 2. F…

Sh. Manish Periwal, Kolkata vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5156/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Ms Shweta Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)

…and get notarized the same. Therefore, the notice u/s 142(1) itself is bad in law being outside the purview of section 142(1) and hence the penalty order is illegal on this count also. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied on the case law of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd., 27 ITR 126 (SC). This case law pertains to assessment proceedings and not penalty proceedings. Moreover, this case law pertains to rules of evidence while in the case of the appellant, it is the question of levying penalty without initiating the same and levying the penalty at Rs. 30,000/- while show cause notice was for Rs. 10,000/- only. The Ld. CIT (A) I…