Dwarka Prasad Agarwal v. ITO

52 ITD 239Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1995#10689 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 115BBE Section 132 Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

capital expenditure section 37(1)section 37 assistant commissioner search and seizure section 142(1)section 132 section 15 section 25 section 148 transfer person

Judgments citing Dwarka Prasad Agarwal v. ITO

SRI PREM PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-24(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 957/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sri Prem Properties Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 24 (1), A – 99, Bajghera Chowk, Delhi. New Palam Vihar, Gurgaon – 122 017 (Haryana). (Pan :Aaacs2554E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Skasham Agarwal, Ca Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date Of Order : 24.10.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)]Dated 04.01.2024 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 30.09.2012 Declaring An Income Of Rs.2,15,340/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny For The Year Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, CIT DR

Section 132Section 147Section 148

…same should have been verified by the Ld. CIT(A) at the appellate stage. In our view, no expenses can be disallowed on the adhoc basis. We rely on the findings of following judicial precedents, Beta Naphthol (P) Ltd (50 TTJ (IND) 375), Dwarka Prasad Agarwal (52 ITD 239 (CAL)). Further, we already held that the initiation of proceedings u/s 147 is bad in law, the above findings are only academic in nature. 11. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 24th day of October, 2025. sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.10.2025 TS…

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 695/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…the finding of the Tribunal that additions was made partly on the basis of guess work and was unsustainable and there was also no reason to restore the matter back to the assessing officer for re-examining. • In the case of Dwarka Prasad Agarwal vs ITO [1995] 52 ITD 239 (Calcutta) the assessing officer disallowed Rs 30,000 of publicity and advertisement expenditure on an estimated basis which was confirmed in first appeal. On second appeal, the disallowance was deleted by the Calcutta Bench of Tribunal observing that since complete details had been filed by the assessee with regard to the expenditure and no speci…

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 694/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

RAJNANDGAON PETROL SERVICE, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 553/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.553/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Rajnandgaon Petrol Service Partner : Kulwant Singh Bhatia, Pendri, G.E. Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aagfr7601E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…Income Tax Vs. Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Limited 26 ITR 775 (SC) (ii)Monarch Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 54 TTJ 405; (iii) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arthur Anderson & Co. 94 TTJ 736 (iv) Dwarka Prasad Agrawal Vs. ITO, 52 ITD 239 (v) CIT Vs. SSP (P) Ltd. 202 Taxman 386 (vi) Cardiac Care & Allied Health Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, ITA No.247/JP/2019 (vii) M/s. Sunia Finlease Ltd. Vs. ITO, ITA No.07/RPR/2017 8. As the assessee firm had failed to substantiate its claim for deduction of tanker expenses of Rs.43,99,618/- based on supporting bills and vouchers etc., therefore, I am of…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(1), NEW DELHI vs. MODI RUBBER LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4864/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…n the second place, there was no question of remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for re¬examination of the same question. 4 9. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Dwarka Prasad Agarwal Vs. ITO reported at 52 ITD 239 wherein it has been held that the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any expenditure of personal nature relating to partner of employee of the assessee. The adhoc disallowance made by the Assessing Officer without supporting evidence was not permissible. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Am…

SONI HOSPITALS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jt. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…ance and confirmed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) is not justified. Hence, ad hoc disallowance is deleted”. (vi) Further reliance is placed on the following few decisions on similar issues- • J J Enterprises Vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC) • Dwarka Prasad Agarwal Vs. ITO 52 ITD 239 • ACIT Vs. Amtek Auto Ltd. 112 TTJ 455 In view of above, your honours are therefore humbly requested to please delete the disallowance.” 3. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and our reference was drawn to the findings of the ld. CIT(A) which reads as under:- “2.3 I have perused the facts of the case, the assessme…

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE- 16(2), NEW DELHI vs. MAX MEDICAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4711/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.4711 & 8340/Del/2018 अपील िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit, Circle-16(2), Room No.308, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110002 Vs Max Medical Services Ltd. 1, Dr. Jha Marg, Okhla, Phase-Iii, New Delhi-110020 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aadcm3619D आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1819 & 5477/Del/2017 अपील िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit, Circle-16(2), Room No.308, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110002 Vs Max Medical Services Ltd. 1, Dr. Jha Marg, Okhla, Phase-Iii, New Delhi-110020 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aadcm3619D अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sh. Atul Ninawat, C.A. Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Atul Ninawat, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)

…c vouchers of disallowable nature. The said action of the AO was purely based on suspicion and surmises without bringing any evidence on record in support of the disallowance. The reliance was placed on the following case laws:  Dwarka Prasad Agarwal Vs ITO 52 ITD 239 (Cal)  Rattah Mechanical Works Ltd. Vs ITO 87 Taxman 288 (Chd.)  Shriram Pistons and Rings Ltd. Vs IAC 39 TTJ 132 (Del.) Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2015-16  Roger Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITA 52 TTJ 198 (Del.)  Ramji Das Modi Vs DCIT 110 Taxman 107 (JP)  ACIT Vs Bateli Tea Co. Ltd. (2003) SOT 72  Continental Seeds & Chemicals Ltd. Vs ACIT…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MODI RUBBER LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 105/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri B.P. Jain, [Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A.C.I.T Vs. M/S Modi Rubber Ltd Circle – 5(1) 4 – 7C, Dda Shopping Centre New Delhi New Friends Colony New Delhi Pan : Aaacm 2062 R [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rohit JainFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A.C.I.T Vs. M/s Modi Rubber Ltd Circle – 5(1) 4 – 7C, DDA Shopping Centre New Delhi New Friends Colony New Delhi PAN : AAACM 2062 R [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 18.10.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Assessee by : Shri Rohit Jain Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal of the Revenue arises from the order dated 04.10.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-…

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ITR 389 (Del)].Further he stated that, in the following cases, adhoc disallowance made in absence of any specific mention of any unvouched expenditure liable to be disallowed has been held to be untenable and not called for. (i) Dwarka Prasad Agarwal v. ITO: 52 ITD 239 (Cal) Hero MotoCorp Limited Vs. JCIT & DCIT Vs. Hero MotoCorp Ltd. ITA Nos. 1545/Del/2015 and 2424/Del/2015 (AY 2010-11) ITA No. 1609/Del/2016 and 914/Del/2016 (AY 2011-12) Page 341 of 484 (ii) Mahendra Oil cake Industries Pvt. Ltd. v ACIT: 55 TTJ 711 (Ahd.) (iii) Rattah Mechanical Works Ltd. v ITO: 87 Taxman 288 (Mag)Cd.) (iv) Shriram Pistons a…

CONTITECH INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3443/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 3443/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Contitech India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Dsm 249, Dlf Tower, Shivaji Tax, Circle-6(2), Marg, Najafgarh Road, Industrial New Delhi Area, New Delhi-110015 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcr6921P Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Puneet Chugh, Ca Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Swain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.01.2016 Of The Ao Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. C. Swain, Sr. DR

Section 144CSection 37(1)Section 92C

…fore him, the AO without pointing out any specific instance of non- incurrence of said expenditure, had simply disallowed @ 5% of the total expenditure which was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Dwarka Prasad Agarwal Vs ITO 52 ITD 239 (Cal) " Mahendra Oil Cake Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT 55 TTJ 711 " Rattah Mechanical Works Ltd. Vs ITO 87 Taxman 288 (Chd.) " Shriram Pistons and Rings Ltd. Vs IAC 39 TTJ 132(Del.) " CIT Vs Gemi Motors India Ltd. in ITA 130 of 2011 " J.J. Enterprises Vs CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC) " Friends Clearing Agency P. Ltd. Vs CIT 332 ITR 269 (Del) " Nodi Exports…