Dr. Mansukh\nKanjibhai Shah v. ACIT

129 ITD 376Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#18942 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

panchnamasection 292csection 132(1)section 158bsection 292section 158search assessmentsection 29section 153cincriminating materialsearch and seizuresection 153

Judgments citing Dr. Mansukh\nKanjibhai Shah v. ACIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Income Tax Office vs. Supreme Polymers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the results the appeal of the

ITA 189/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…of ACIT VS. K.G. Finvest (P.) Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 627 (Delhi - Trib.); ITAT Bench, Mumbai in the case of Unique Star Developers Vs. DCIT [2017] 83 taxmann.com 83 (Mumbai Trib.); ITAT Bench, Ahemdabad in the case of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shah Vs. ACIT: 129 ITD 376 (Ahd.), for the same proposition of law. …………………….. 18 DCIT vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 21. Now what can be concluded is that the manual cash book contained entries related to cash withdrawals and expenses of Company which were duly recorded and reconciled with its books of account, as also cash introduced, withdrawn and expenses on behalf…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru vs. M/S. Blueline Foods (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mangaluru

ITA 182/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 255(4)

…m Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., in ITA Nos.196 to 198/Del/2011 were not distinguished by the ld. CIT-DR. 7.7 The ld. CIT-DR tried to distinguish another case law of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shah vs. ACIT reported in [2011] 129 ITD 376 (Ahd.Trib.) by stating that search warrants were not served on the assessee in whose case search u/s.132 of the Act was to be taken. Hence, he stated that warrant was executed but in the case of respondent assessee Blueline Foods (India) Pvt. Ltd., as evidenced by signatures of directors on the warrants, the search was conducted on the respondent…

Bijender Singh Lohia, New Delhi vs. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle-26, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 1529/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sunita Verma, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 2(24)(iv)Section 69C

…- Trib.); ITAT Bench, Mumbai in the case of Unique Star Developers Vs. DCIT [2017] 83 taxmann.com 83 (Mumbai - Trib.); ITAT Bench, Ahemdabad in Bijender Singh Lohia vs. JCIT (OSD) ITAs No.1528 & 1529/Del/2022 the case of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shah Vs. ACIT: 129 ITD 376 (Ahd.), for the same proposition of law. 13. In the submissions filed, the Ld. AR has specifically distinguished the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs S. Ajit Kumar; 404 ITR 526, as relied by Ld CIT(A) for the following reasons: i) No incriminating material was found from the premises of the assessee; ii) The scope of the aforesaid de…

Bijender Singh Lohia, New Delhi vs. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle-26, New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 1528/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sunita Verma, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 2(24)(iv)Section 69C

…- Trib.); ITAT Bench, Mumbai in the case of Unique Star Developers Vs. DCIT [2017] 83 taxmann.com 83 (Mumbai - Trib.); ITAT Bench, Ahemdabad in Bijender Singh Lohia vs. JCIT (OSD) ITAs No.1528 & 1529/Del/2022 the case of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shah Vs. ACIT: 129 ITD 376 (Ahd.), for the same proposition of law. 13. In the submissions filed, the Ld. AR has specifically distinguished the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs S. Ajit Kumar; 404 ITR 526, as relied by Ld CIT(A) for the following reasons: i) No incriminating material was found from the premises of the assessee; ii) The scope of the aforesaid de…

Dr. Mansukh\nKanjibhai Shah v. ACIT (129 ITD 376) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax