GTC Industries Ltd. v. ACIT

65 ITD 380Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1998#892 most cited

What is GTC Industries Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Formal cross-examination of witnesses who make adverse reports is not an invariable requirement of natural justice (audi alteram partem) in income tax proceedings. Assessees must have a fair opportunity to meet adverse evidence, but this does not mandate formal cross-examination.

119

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

GTC Industries Ltd v ACIT · 65 ITD 380 · ITAT Mumbai 1998 · natural justice principles · audi alteram partem · cross-examination of witnesses · adverse evidence · opportunity to rebut · Section 147 · Section 148 · tax assessment procedure

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing GTC Industries Ltd. v. ACIT

Soumitra Choudhury, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 22, Kolkata

ITA 256/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ate that the AO has erred in holding the LTCG of Rs.70,25,200 as bogus. The cases are listed as below: a. Jatin Chhadwa in ITA No. 8573/Mum/2010 b. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) c. GTC Industries Limited vs. ACIT reported in (2017) 164 ITD 1 d. Kiron Kothari HUF vs. ITO, ITA No. 443/Kol/2017 e. Gautam Kr Pincha vs. ITO, ITA No. 569/Kol/2017 f. ITO vs. Shale en Kemani, ITA No. 1945/Kol/2014 g. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr CIT Vs Rungta Properties Private Limited ITAT No 105 of 2016 h. Smita S Patil v. ACIT (ITA No.1407-1409/PN/2012), i. ITAT Kolkata in the case of DCIT…

Purushottam Das Agarwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 35(1), Kolkata

ITA 2421/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ate that the AO has erred in holding the LTCG of Rs.70,25,200 as bogus. The cases are listed as below: a. Jatin Chhadwa in ITA No. 8573/Mum/2010 b. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) c. GTC Industries Limited vs. ACIT reported in (2017) 164 ITD 1 d. Kiron Kothari HUF vs. ITO, ITA No. 443/Kol/2017 e. Gautam Kr Pincha vs. ITO, ITA No. 569/Kol/2017 f. ITO vs. Shale en Kemani, ITA No. 1945/Kol/2014 g. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr CIT Vs Rungta Properties Private Limited ITAT No 105 of 2016 h. Smita S Patil v. ACIT (ITA No.1407-1409/PN/2012), i. ITAT Kolkata in the case of DCIT…

Shri Udit Agarwal, Kolkata vs. DCIT(It)-2(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed accordingly

ITA 1839/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2014-15 Shri Udit Agarwal V/S. Dcit (It)-2(1), 110, 3, Madan Mohan Burman Shanti Pally, Kolkata- Street, Kolkataa-007 107 [Pan No.Ahupa 0424 B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-12-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 26-12-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22,Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.05.2017 Passed In Case No.71/Cit(A)/22/Kol/14-15/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Learned Representatives. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Treating Its Long Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) Of ₹64,99,391/- To Be Unexplained Cash Credits U/S 68 Of The Act. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Under:- ”06. Decision: 1. I Have Carefully Considered The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Treating The Amount Of Rs.67,24,391/- Being Claimed By The Appellant To Be Proceeds Of Shares Sold To Be Ltcg & Claimed As Exempt. The Findings Of The Ld. Ao Are Based On The Information Being Supplied By The Investigation Wing Of The Department At Kolkata. I Have Also Carefully Examined The Submissions Of The Appellant, Wherein

Section 143(3)Section 68

…s to be corroborated by some evidence to establish a link that the assessee had brought back his unaccounted income in the form of LTCG. The ld AR referred to the judgement of Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of GTC Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT [2017] 164 ITD 1 (Mumbai-Trib.)(SB) The Tribunal observed as under: 46. ......... Ultimately the entire case of Revenue hinges upon the presumption that assessee is bound to have some large share in so called secret money in the form of premium and its circulation. However, this presumption or suspicion how strong it may appear to be true but needs to be corroborat…