Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT

265 ITR 25High Court2004#658 most cited

What is Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT authority for?

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not automatically imposed upon an assessee's failure to contest a quantum addition or if two views are possible; the Assessing Officer must prove the charge of concealment or inaccurate particulars. Furthermore, an Assessing Officer can disallow a claim during assessment if it is patently false on examination of facts.

151

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT · penalty section 271(1)(c) · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · penalty not automatic · burden of proof Assessing Officer · two views possible penalty · disallowance of false claim · assessment procedure · 265 ITR 25 · 130 Taxmann 553

Also reported as

130 Taxmann 553

Sections most often in play

Section 69ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 132(4)Section 69CSection 131(1A)Section 292C

Issues it is cited on

section 292csection 153a(1)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty under section 271(1)(c)advance taxpenalty u/s 271(1)(c)concealment of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularssearch assessmentsection 132aprincipal commissioner of income-taxloose papers

Judgments citing Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5104/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5103/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5102/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5101/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5100/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5099/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5098/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4957/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4956/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,HARYANA vs. JCIT (OSD), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4955/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4954/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4953/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4952/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SACHIN MUTREJA,HARYANA vs. JCIT(OSD), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4951/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…sumptions without any corroborative evidence. a. D. N. Singh v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, [2023] 454 ITR 595 (SC) b. Kantilal Chandulal & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,136 ITR 889 (Calcutta) - para 7 & 8 c. Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT, [2004] 265 ITR 25 (Calcutta) - para 8 d. CIT v. Ravi Kumar [2007] 294 ITR 78 (Punjab & Haryana) - para 7 & 8 e. CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem [1996] 88 TAXMAN 323 (KER.) - para 22-29 & 31 f. ACIT v. Trilok Chaudhary, ITA No. 1450/Del/2024 - para 16-18 & 77 g. ACIT v. Navneet Kumar Sureka, ITA No. 5573, 6660 & 6661/Del/2016 - para 10 & 11 h. DCIT v. Yograj Arora, ITA No.…

SANGEETA AGGARWAL,SANGEETA AGGARWAL AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 CHANDIGARH, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 335/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…n the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (30 ITR 181) rejected additions without there being any adverse evidence and where the addition was made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the sa…

SANGEETA AGGARWAL,SANGEETA AGGARWAL AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 CHANDIGARH, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 334/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…n the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (30 ITR 181) rejected additions without there being any adverse evidence and where the addition was made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the sa…

SANGEETA AGGARWAL,SANGEETA AGGARWAL AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 CHANDIGARH, DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 333/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…n the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (30 ITR 181) rejected additions without there being any adverse evidence and where the addition was made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the sa…

SANGEETA AGGARWAL,SANGEETA AGGARWAL, AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 CHANDIGARH, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 330/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…n the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (30 ITR 181) rejected additions without there being any adverse evidence and where the addition was made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the sa…

SANGEETA AGGARWAL,SANGEETA AGGARWAL, AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 CHANDIGARH, CENTRAL CIRCLE CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 329/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

…n the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (30 ITR 181) rejected additions without there being any adverse evidence and where the addition was made on suspicion without countering affidavit / statement on record. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) rejected additions which were made without corroborating evidences. Similar is the decision in Atam Valves Pvt. Ltd. (332 ITR 468). The Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Harvinder Pal Singla (ITA 456-458/Chd/2014) has rejected similar assumption as made by Ld. AO. The other decisions as cited by the assessee during first appeal reinforces the sa…

M/S SINGLA BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS LIMITED,RUPNAGAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 487/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

…satisfy the requirement of 4th proviso to Sec.153A(1) which mandate that the escaped income should be represented in the form of an asset. This condition was not satisfied in the present case. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Ravi Kumar (294 ITR 78) held that loose slips recording some transactions in itself is not the finding of undisclosed asset. Therefore, the jurisdiction of Ld. AO was bad-in-law. In the present case, not even single evidence in the shape of agreement with the party, affidavit or cash book ledger was found by the search team which would corroborate the contents of the l…

Showing 1–20 of 151 · Page 1 of 8

...
Durga Kamal Rice Mills v. CIT (265 ITR 25) — Cited in 151 Judgments | BharatTax