Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO

132 ITR 707High Court1981#5465 most cited

What is Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The court can examine whether the Assessing Officer had material to form a 'reason to believe' that income had escaped assessment, though the sufficiency of those reasons is not investigable. The 'reason to believe' must stem from an honest and reasonable person's grounds suggesting income escapement.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO · 132 ITR 707 · HC · 1981 · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 149 · Section 151 · reason to believe · income escaping assessment · tangible material · borrowed satisfaction · non-application of mind · material facts necessary for assessment · first proviso to section 147

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

Issues it is cited on

material facts necessary for assessmentfirst proviso to section 147kelvinatorlive linkincome escaping assessmentborrowed satisfactionsection 292btangible materialescapement of incomereason to believesection 292non-application of mind

Judgments citing Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…and bad in law. 15. Reference in this regard may be made to following judgements: 16. It has been similarly held in the following decisions: - Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC) - Sheo Nath Singh vs. ACIT 82 ITR 148 (SC) - Biria VXL vs. ACIT 217 ITR 1 (Guj) - Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. vs UOI 324 ITR 54 (Bom.) - ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 448 (SC) 17. Reason to believe', it is submitted, cannot be equated with reason to suspect [refer Krown Agro Foods (P) Ltd vx ACIT: 375 ITR 460 (Deli. GS P a g e | 10 Lasco Chemie (P) Ltd. (AY 2012-13) Engineering & Construction Corporation vs DD…

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), NEW DEL;HI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…ways examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the court." 52. It has been similarly held in the following decisions: Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC); Birla VXL vs. ACIT 217 ITR 1 (Guj); Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. vs UOI 324 ITR 54 (Bom.) ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 448 (SC) Arjun Singh vs. ADIT 246 ITR 363 (MP) Seth Brothers vs. JCIT 251 ITR 270 (Guj.) Bombay Pharma Products vs. ITO 237 ITR 614 (MP) Lokendra Singh Rathore vs. WTO 155 ITR 629 (MP) United Electrical Co. (P) Limited vs. CIT 258 ITR 317 (Del.) 53. I…

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 5(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…ways examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the court." 52. It has been similarly held in the following decisions: Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC); Birla VXL vs. ACIT 217 ITR 1 (Guj); Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. vs UOI 324 ITR 54 (Bom.) ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 448 (SC) Arjun Singh vs. ADIT 246 ITR 363 (MP) Seth Brothers vs. JCIT 251 ITR 270 (Guj.) Bombay Pharma Products vs. ITO 237 ITR 614 (MP) Lokendra Singh Rathore vs. WTO 155 ITR 629 (MP) United Electrical Co. (P) Limited vs. CIT 258 ITR 317 (Del.) 53. I…

ACIT CIRCLE-59(1), NEW DELHI vs. NEERAJ KUMAR SINGHAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.283/DEL/2021 Assessment Year 2009-10 ACIT, Neeraj Kumar Singhal Circle-59(1) Vs. 38, FIE, Functional Industrial Delhi. Estate, Delhi-110092 TAN/PAN: AATPS3546G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CA Respondent by: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 21 08 2023 Date of pronouncement: 09 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Incom…

BALLU SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -65(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…Shri Mahavir Parsad Vs. ITO (ITA No 924/DEL/2015) (Paper book page no. 122-131) 2.10 We also place our reliance on the decisions of the various hon’ble courts in the cases of a) Joti Prasad vs. State of Haryana 1993 AIR 1167 (SC) b) Ashok Kumar Sen V/s CIT 132 ITR 707 (Del. HC) c) United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 258 ITR 317 (Del HC) d) CIT v. Kelvinator India (256 ITR 1, SC) e) Sarthak Securities Co. P. Ltd. vs. ITO - (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Delhi) f) Indian Oil Corporation V/s ITO 159 ITR 956 (SC) g) Dass Friends Builders P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2006) 280 ITR 77(A11) h) Madanlal Jindal vs. ITO (197…

BALLU SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -65(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…Shri Mahavir Parsad Vs. ITO (ITA No 924/DEL/2015) (Paper book page no. 122-131) 2.10 We also place our reliance on the decisions of the various hon’ble courts in the cases of a) Joti Prasad vs. State of Haryana 1993 AIR 1167 (SC) b) Ashok Kumar Sen V/s CIT 132 ITR 707 (Del. HC) c) United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 258 ITR 317 (Del HC) d) CIT v. Kelvinator India (256 ITR 1, SC) e) Sarthak Securities Co. P. Ltd. vs. ITO - (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Delhi) f) Indian Oil Corporation V/s ITO 159 ITR 956 (SC) g) Dass Friends Builders P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2006) 280 ITR 77(A11) h) Madanlal Jindal vs. ITO (197…

SHRI.J M VRUSHABENDRAIAH ,HOSPET vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

…lat Ram Rawatmul [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC), (iii) Equitable Investment Co. [P.] Ltd. vs ITO G- Ward And Others 174 ITR 714 (Cal) (iv) Hindustan Lever Limited V. R.B. Wadkar, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 268 ITR 332 (Bom) (v) Birla VXL Ltd Vs ACIT [1995] 217 ITR 1 (Guj) (vi) CIT Vs. N. Thippashetty [2010] 322 ITR 525 (Kar) (vii) Assam Co. Ltd v. UOI 150 Taxman 571 (Gau) (viii) Commissioner of Income-tax-V v. Orient Craft Ltd. [2013] 29 taxmann.com 392 (DELHI) Shri J.M. Vrushabendraiah, Hospete Page 30 of 58 (ix) Prashant S. Joshi v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 19(2)(4) [2010] 189 TAXMAN 1 (BOM.) 6. The Ld. D.…

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 59/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 59/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. 7/58, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Ward 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Advpa 6150 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 27/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Learned C.I.T. (A) Has Erred For Not Considering The Issue For Validity Of Issue Notice U/S 148 Of I.T. Act, 1961, While There Was No Escapement Of Income On Part Of Assessee. The Initiation Of Proceedings Was Only On Behest Of I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Who Has Intimated To A.O. For Advancement Of Loan Rs.53,95,000/- Given By Assessee To Pooja Agarwal, While Concern A.O. Has Accepted Said Loan In Her Hands After Detailed Examination. Hence Initiation Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151

…or `ITR has not been filed’, without disclosing the reasons, which led the assessing officer to hold such a belief, does not confer valid jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to take action u/s 147 and 148 as held in the case of Birla VXL Ltd. v. ACIT (1996) 217 ITR 1 (Guj.) 7 ITA 59/JP/2019_ Vijay Kr Agarwal Vs ITO 1.2.5 In ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the High Court and held that there was nothing to show in the confession made by a third party related to the loan taken by the assessee much less a loan which was shown to have advanced by…

ABHISHEK DHANOTIA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 3(1), INDORE

ITA 655/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 1Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 69

…ss of reasoning he holds such a belief. Merely saying the income has escaped assessment does not confer jurisdiction on the AO to take action u/s 148 rws 147 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Birla VXL 217 ITR 1. Action of the Ld. AO per se reflects that the matter required detailed investigation and further verification which at best could be categorized as AO having ‘reasons to suspect’ and not reasons to believe. Assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO on the basis of reasons to suspect is invalid and the entire proceedings so undertaken with the sole…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…s Pvt. Ltd. 343 ITR 141 (DEL) 39. Satnam Overseas. 228 CTR 121 (Del) 40. Ashok Mittal, 224 Taxman 55 (Del) 41. Orient Craft Ltd. 354 ITR 536 (Del) 42. Sheo Nath Singh. 82 ITR 148 (SC) document1 43. Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd, 130 ITR 1. 11 (SC) 44. Birla VXL, 217 ITR 1 (Gujrat) 45. Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. 324 ITR 54 (Bombay) 46. Garden Finance Limited, 268 ITR 48(Guj) 47. Kamlesh Sharma, 287 ITR 337 (Del) 48. Allana Cold Storage Ltd.. Vs. ITO 287 ITR 1 (Bom) 49. Asian Paints Limited, 296 ITR 90 (Bom) 50. Keshav Shares and Stocks Ltd, 326 ITR 553(Del) 51. Vishwanath Engineers, 354 ITR211(Guj) 52. Aroni Commerci…

DIVYA ,HISAR vs. ITO, WARD- 1, HISAR

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

ITA 6097/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Suchitra Kamble, [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Divya, Ito, D/O-Shri Kailash Chand, 151, Kala Ward-1, Mandir Saree, Palika Bazar, Hisar, Hisar, Haryana Haryana

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Divya, ITO, D/o-Shri Kailash Chand, 151, Kala Ward-1, Mandir Saree, Palika Bazar, Hisar, Hisar, Haryana Haryana PAN-ANOPD1116H Assessee Revenue Assessee by Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, C.A. Revenue by Shri S. L. Anuragi-DR Date of Hearing 04/09/2019 Date of Pronouncement 15/10/2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed against the order dated 26/07/2018, passed by the CIT(A)-2, Gurga…

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…must be that of an honest and reasonable person based upon reasonable grounds and that the ITO may act on direct or circumstantial evidence but not on mere suspicion, gossip or rumour—SheoNath Singh v. AAC [1971] 82 ITR 147 (SC), Asoke Kumar Sen v. ITO [1981] 132 ITR 707 (Delhi), Manikonda Venkata Narasimhamv. CIT [I960] 39 ITR 575 (AP), R.S. ChiranjiLal& Sons v. CIT [1959] 36 ITR 407 (Punj.), Birds Investments Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 55 ITR 285 (Cat.) and Bhagwan Industries (P.) Ltd. v. CST [1970] 25 STC 420 (All) The expression does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction of the ITO, the forum of decision as to th…

GROW MORE CERAMICS PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE,, MEHSANA

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2204/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri Parimal Singh Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. Nos: 2204 & 2205/AHD/2017 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Grow More Ceramics Pvt. V/S ACIT, Mehsana Circle, Ltd. 591, Kotha Ta. Kalol, Mehsana Gandhinagar (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCG8742P Appellant by : Shri Parimal Singh Parmar, AR Respondent by : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R. (आदेश)/ORDER Date of hearing : 09 -05-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 21-05-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. These two appeals filed by the Assessee are…

RADIANCE STOCK TRADERS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4542/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. LalitFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234BSection 68

…the case of DCIT vs. Gyandeep Khemka in ITA No. 695/JP/2018. 4. CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) 5. reported in 291 ITR 500 (SC) 6. 395 ITR 255 (Del.) Rajiv Aggarwal vs. ACIT 7. 321 ITR 526 (Del.) CIT vs. Batra Bhatta & Co. 8. 132 ITR 707 at page 710 Ashok Kumar Sen vs. ITO. 9. 298 ITR 198 (Del.) Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. vs. ACIT. 10. 87 ITR 349 (SC) CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull 11. 82 ITR 147 (SC) Sheo Nath Singh vs. AAC. 12. 258 ITR 317 (Del.) United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 13. 253 ITR 83 Bawa Abhai Singh. 14. 159 ITR 956 (SC( CIT vs. Indian Oil Corporation. 15. 10…

MR. JAGAT SINGH,,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3039/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…n held that in the absence of any tangible material, no valid proceedings could be held sustainable in law: i. ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) at 448 ii. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) iii. Ashok Kumar Sen Vs ITO 132 ITR 707 (Del.) 7. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is well settled rule of law that existence of the tangible material with the Assessing Officer for the formation of the reasons to believe is pre-condition. In the instant case, in fact till March, 2015 when the Tribunal had disposed off the assessee’s father’s appeal, no material was found availabl…

MR. JAGAT SINGH,,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3038/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…n held that in the absence of any tangible material, no valid proceedings could be held sustainable in law: i. ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) at 448 ii. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) iii. Ashok Kumar Sen Vs ITO 132 ITR 707 (Del.) 7. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is well settled rule of law that existence of the tangible material with the Assessing Officer for the formation of the reasons to believe is pre-condition. In the instant case, in fact till March, 2015 when the Tribunal had disposed off the assessee’s father’s appeal, no material was found availabl…

MR. JAGAT SINGH,,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3037/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…n held that in the absence of any tangible material, no valid proceedings could be held sustainable in law: i. ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) at 448 ii. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) iii. Ashok Kumar Sen Vs ITO 132 ITR 707 (Del.) 7. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is well settled rule of law that existence of the tangible material with the Assessing Officer for the formation of the reasons to believe is pre-condition. In the instant case, in fact till March, 2015 when the Tribunal had disposed off the assessee’s father’s appeal, no material was found availabl…

MR. JAGAT SINGH,,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3036/DEL/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…n held that in the absence of any tangible material, no valid proceedings could be held sustainable in law: i. ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) at 448 ii. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) iii. Ashok Kumar Sen Vs ITO 132 ITR 707 (Del.) 7. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is well settled rule of law that existence of the tangible material with the Assessing Officer for the formation of the reasons to believe is pre-condition. In the instant case, in fact till March, 2015 when the Tribunal had disposed off the assessee’s father’s appeal, no material was found availabl…

ACHLA DHAWAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2165/DEL/2008[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri S. K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ITA. 2165 (Del) of 2008. Smt. Achla Dhawan, Meerut. 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [DELHI BENCHES: “ C ” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI S. K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I. T. Appeal No. 2165 (Del) of 2008 Assessment Year : 2000-01. Smt. Achla Dhawan, Income Tax Officer, Vs. 104/2, Thapar Nagar, Ward : 1(1) M E E R U T [ U. P. ] M E E R U T. PAN : AALPD 9004 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K. Sampath, Adv. & Shri V. Raja Kumar, Adv.; Department by : Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. D. R.; Date of Hearing : 24.05.2018; Date of Pronouncement: O R D E R. PE…

GORIKA INVESTMENT AND EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 10(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3396/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 3396/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 M/S Gorika Investment & Vs Income Tax Officer, Exports (P) Ltd., 531Sg Ward-10(2), Complex, Dc Chowk Market, New Delhi Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacg2462K Assessee By : Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv., Sh. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Adv. & Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.06.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.02.2018 Of Ld. Cit(A)-35, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234Section 68Section 69C

…s (P) Ltd. Vs ITO in ITA No. 491/Del/2014 order dated 15.07.2016 " Pragati Vanijya Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5096/Del/2014 order dated 31.07.2017 " Rajiv Aggarwal Vs ACIT 395 ITR 255 (Del.) " CIT Vs Batra Bhatta & CO. 321 ITR 526 (Del.) " Ashok Kumar Sen Vs ITO 132 ITR 707 (Del.) " Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. Vs ACIT 398 ITR 198 (Del.) " CIT Vs G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) " Unique Metal Industries Vs ITO in ITA No. 1372/Del/2015 order dated 28.10.2015 " Punjab Metal Store Vs ITO in ITA No. 512/Del/2015 order dated 02.12.2015 " Jiten Gurnani Vs ITO in ITA No. 4908/Del/2012 order dated 31.03.2015 " Banke Bi…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2