Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT

179 ITR 122High Court1989#3786 most cited

What is Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer should exercise discretion under Section 40A(3) by considering business expediency, surrounding circumstances, and the facts of each case, balancing legal requirements with assessee hardship, rather than relying solely on Board circulars.

31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT · 179 ITR 122 · Section 40A(3) · Section 40A · business expediency · genuineness of transaction · discretion of ITO · cash payments · tax evasion · BharatTax

Sections most often in play

Section 40A(3)Section 6DDSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 1962Section 1965

Issues it is cited on

business expediencysection 40a(3)section 40asection 40income-tax officergenuineness of the transactiontransferpersonbusinesssection 143(3)interesttotal income

Judgments citing Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, WARDHA, WARDHA vs. PADMAKAR KRUSHNAJI WARBHE, HINGANGHAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 377/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 40A(3)

…The AO also held that the case of the assessee is not covered\nby the exceptions mentioned under rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules, 1962.\nWhile making the addition, the AO also referred to the decision of Hon'ble\nCalcutta High Court in Girdharilal Goenka vs CIT 179 ITR 122 (Kol), wherein it\nwas held that the object of provision of section 40A(3) is to check evasion of\ntaxes so that the payment is made from the disclosed sources. The AO\ndisallowed only 20% total such payment of Rs.50,80,15,450/- thereby\ndisallowed Rs.10,16,03,090/- and added to total income.\n6. We find that before Id. CIT(A) the assessee filed…

SABHA CHAND,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2, NARNUAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2790/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं.2790/िद"ी/2022 (िन.व. 2014-15) Sabha Chand, 25-Ka-6, Jyoti Nagar Housing Board Lal, Kothi, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302005 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan No: Asqpc-9509-C बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Nnl, Haryana 132001

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Ms Sakashi Rustagi, Advocates &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 40A(3)

…dentity can be established, it would be possible for the ITO to cross check whether the transaction had, in fact, taken place as stated and was of a genuine nature. 6. A similar view is expressed by the Calcutta High Court in Giridharilal Goenka v. CIT [1989] 179 ITR 122 where it was observed that, "The circular of the Board is not exhaustive, it is only illustrative and the Assessing Officer has to take into account the surrounding, circumstances, considerations of business expediency and the facts of each particular case in exercising his discretion either in favour or against the assessee". It was also held th…

PRASHANT PACKAGING PVT.LTD,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIR-2, PATNA, PATNA

ITA 644/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] Ι.Τ.Α. No. 644/Pat/2024

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

…ty that the bonus is a statutory liability and without disputing the genuineness and identity of the recipients i.e. the employees. The Ld. Counsel cited following decisions: i) Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Girdharilal Goenka vs. CIT 179 ITR 122 (Cal) ii) CIT vs. CPL Tannery in 318 ITR page 179 iii) Gurdas Garg vs. CIT(A) & Ors. [2016] 6 ITR OL 101 (P & H) iv) Honey Enterprises vs. CIT [2016] 381 ITR 258 (Del) v) Union of India vs. Exide Industries Ltd. [2020] 425 ITR 1 vi) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT in [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) Th…

THOTA RAMAIAH L/R T VASUNDHARA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1626/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya, Sr.A.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 80C

…se of business. He relied on the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Hasanand Pinjomal Vs. CIT reported in (1978) 112 ITR 134, Walford Transport (Eastern India) Limited Vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 902 (Gau), Giridharilal Goenka Vs. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 122 (Cal), S. Venkata Subbarao Vs. CIT (1988) 173 ITR 340 (AP), Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. ITO reported in 191 ITR 667 etc., 6.3 Ld. AR further submitted that provision of section 40A(3) as well as Rule 6DD are not intended to restrict business activities and that the terms of section 40A(3) of the Act are not absolute. Ld. AR further submitted t…

SHYAMAPADA JANA,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WD-2(2) , NOW WARD-39(2), MEDINIPUR

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

ITA 597/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 40A(3)

…penses are not doubted, in that case the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act are not applicable. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Girdharilal Goenka Vs. CIT reported in [1986] 179 ITR 122 (Calcutta) wherein it has been held that where assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of payment would Page 3 of 10 I.T.A. Nos.: 596 & 597/KOL/2023 AYs: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shyamapada Jana. not take out assessee’s case out of am…

SHYAMAPADA JANA,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WD-2(2) , NOW WARD-39(2), MEDINIPUR

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

ITA 596/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 40A(3)

…penses are not doubted, in that case the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act are not applicable. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Girdharilal Goenka Vs. CIT reported in [1986] 179 ITR 122 (Calcutta) wherein it has been held that where assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of payment would Page 3 of 10 I.T.A. Nos.: 596 & 597/KOL/2023 AYs: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shyamapada Jana. not take out assessee’s case out of am…

M/S. SHREE TIRUPATI ASSOCIATES,BHILWARA vs. ITO, BHILWARA

ITA 2/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 30Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…need otherwise the transaction would have not materialized. An exceptional and unavoidable circumstances posing genuine difficulty was there. Above circular has been explained in - The above said circular was commented upon Girdhari lal Goenka v. CIT [1989] 179 ITR 122 (Cal.) with the following observations: “The circular of the Board is not exhaustive but only illustrative. The Income-tax Officer has to take a pragmatic view of the matter. The Income-tax Officer should take a practical approach to problems and strike a balance between the direction of law and hardship to the assessee. He should not enmesh him…

RAJESH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 35(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 139/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 139/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…legislation in form of section 40A(3) which has not changed its character. 6.2 The Boards Circular no 220 has been considered in various judicial pronouncements and a view is expressed by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT [1989] 179 ITR 122, where it was observed that (at p. 128): "The circular of the Board is not exhaustive, it is only illustrative and the Assessing Officer has to take into account the surrounding circumstances, considerations of business expediency and the facts of each particular case in exercising his discretion either in favour or against the assessee'. It was…

B SARAVANAN,TRICHY vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 12(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 721/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)Section 69D

…genuine payment is made to identifiable parties out of disclosed sources, 4. The terms of Section 40A(3) are not absolute according to Allahabad High Court (217 ITR 431), which followed 191 ITR 667 SC; other decisions holding so are: i. 167 ITR 139 Raj ii. 179 ITR 122 Cal iii. 191 ITR 667 SC iv. 200 ITR 490 Del v. 216 ITR 366 Gau vi. 225 ITR 57 Gau vii. 240 ITR 902 Gau viii. 265 ITR 121 Guj ix. 298 ITR 349 Raj x. 366 ITR 122 Gau 5. Even though identical Section 69D requires hundi transactions to be had only by A/c payee cheques, 219 ITR 225 AP and 216 ITR 696 Mds have accepted payments made through account pa…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 42/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 41/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 40/RPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 39/RPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 38/RPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 37/RPR/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

…ipients and his report was called for. The AO has opposed furnishing of any additional evidences. No comments have been made on the merit of the case. If payments are genuine, the disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made as held been held in the case of [1986] 179 ITR 122 (CAL.) Giridharilal Goenka v. Commissioner of Income-tax. In this case the AO has made addition under this section in respect of cash payments. The h’ble High Court held that w here assessee had satisfied Assessing Officer as to genuineness of payment and identity of payee, mere fact that there was time-gap between dates of bills and dates of pay…

V BIRD SHIPPING AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5117/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Athaule (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Leena Srivastav (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5117/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. V. Bird Shipping बिधम/ DCIT, Circle 1(3)(2) Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. 03, Shalon Heritage, Opp Road, Churchgate. RBK School, Phase-6, Indralok, Bhayandar (E), Thane-401105. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCV8654Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rajesh Athaule (AR) Revenue by: Ms. Leena Srivastav (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 07/01/2021 घोषणा क…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SURESH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed on all the grounds

ITA 4111/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4111/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ito, Vs M/S. Suresh Kumar, Ward-52(1), 84/367, Sec-1, Diz Area, New Delhi-110002 Gole Market, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajgpk2729R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2020

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 40A(3)

…lar came to be issued in May, 1977, the assessee is justified in pressing it into aid as the circular merely indicates the circumstances in which rule 6DD( j) would be attracted." 16. The abovesaid circular was commented upon Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT [1989] 179 ITR 122 (Cal.) with the following observations: ". . . The circular of the Board is not exhaustive but only illustrative. The Income-tax Officer has to take a pragmatic view of the matter. The Income-tax Officer should take a practical approach to problems and strike a balance between the direction of law and hardship to the assessee. He should not enme…

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 980/JPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2020AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)
Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 40A(3)

…so that the payment is made from the disclosed sources. Both the payer and the payee would be showing in the respective account the payments made and received. It presupposes that the transactions must be genuine transactions [Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 122, 127 [(Cal)]. In other words, the object of enacting section 40A (3) is to ensure that payments in respect of which deductions are claimed by the taxpayers are genuinely made and accommodation payments are not claimed as deductions [Late Smt. Jyothi Chellaram v. CIT, (1988) 173 ITR 358, 363 (A.P.)]. In the case of assessee who is a colonizer, it…

M/S NAM ESTATES PVT. LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/32/2013HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…) LTD. VS CIT’, (1999) 240 ITR 902 (GAU.), ‘CIT VS. THE SOLUTION’, (2016) 382 ITR 337 (RAJ), ‘ANUPAM TELE SERVICES VS. ITO’, (2014) 366 ITR 122 (GUJ), ‘HONEY ENTERPRISES VS. CIT’, (2016) 236 TAXMAN 519 (DEL), ‘GIRIDHARILAL GOENKA VS. CIT’, (1986) 179 ITR 122 (CAL), ‘R.C.GOEL VS. CIT’, (2013) 213 TAXMAN 305 (DEL), ‘HOTEL NAGAS PVT. LTD. VS. CIT’, 2016-TIOL-1012-HC- MAD-IT, ‘KAMATH MARBLES VS. ITO’, (2003) 260 ITR 470 (KER.), ‘CIT VS. SMT.SHELLY PASSI IN ITA 179/2012 DATED 06.10.2012 (P& H), ‘CIT VS. R.S.SURIYA’, (2015) 232 TAXMAN 126 (MAD), ‘CIT VS. ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO.’, (2009) 318 ITR…

SH. JAI TEG SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptashri Jai Teg Singh, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, # 2431, Sector 79, Ward-6(2), Mohali. Mohali. Pan: Arjps5960R

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR
Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Jai Teg Singh, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, # 2431, Sector 79, Ward-6(2), Mohali. Mohali. PAN: ARJPS5960R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.K.Bhasin, CA Respondent by : Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR Date of hearing : 17.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17.07.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh dated 16.3.2017 relating…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT (179 ITR 122) — Cited in 31 Judgments | BharatTax