Gunda Subbayya v. CIT

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…to the Assessee did not find mention in the pre-\n1961 Act, but courts had held on principles of equity, justice and good conscience that the\nmaterial gathered behind the back of the Assessee should be communicated the assessee (Gunda\nSubbayya v CIT (1939) 7 ITR 21 (Mad). Under the 1961 Act, this requirement is statutorily\nenacted. (See Section 142 (3). The object is to give the assessee an opportunity of giving his\nexplanation and disabusing the Assessing Officer of any wrong impression that he might have\nformed against the assessee. (Gunda Subbayya v CIT (1939) 7 ITR 21 (Mad).\nThat Hon'ble Supreme Court…

KAILASH CHAND,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD, BEHROR, BEHROR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Judicial Member)

…33) 1 ITR 375, 378 (Oudh)]. A best judgment assessment is not by way penalty for non-compliance [Jot Ram Sher Singh Vs. CIT, (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All) and it cannot be made capriciously in utter disregard to the material on record [Gunda Subbayya Vs. CIT, (1939) 7 ITR 21, 26-7 (Mad-- FB); CIT Vs. S. Sen, (1949) 17 ITR 355 (Orissa)].” 2.3 Supporting Case Laws: 2.3.1 In Jot Ram Sher Singh v/s CIT (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All.): An ex-parte assessment should not be influenced by a desire to punish the assessee for non- compliance with a notice. 2.3.2 In Brij Bhushan Lal Parduman Kumar v/s CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524 (SC): The auth…

PUNEET SINGHVI,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

…33) 1 ITR 375, 378 (Oudh)]. A best judgment assessment is not by way penalty for non-compliance [Jot Ram Sher Singh Vs. CIT, (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All) and it cannot be made capriciously in utter disregard to the material on record [Gunda Subbayya Vs. CIT, (1939) 7 ITR 21, 26-7 (Mad-- FB); CIT Vs. S. Sen, (1949) 17 ITR 355 (Orissa)].” 6.3 A decision is in the case of CIT v/s Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog (2002) 256 ITR 243 (Raj): However, your honor shall find that the lower authorities in the present case have not conformed to these settled principles by the courts, while making the impugned assessment u/s 144. Hence, th…

MUSTAFA KATTHAWALA,KOTA vs. DCIT ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

…1 ITR 375, 378 (Oudh)]. A best\njudgment assessment is not by way penalty for non-compliance [Jot\nRam Sher Singh Vs. CIT, (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All) and it cannot be\nmade capriciously in utter disregard to the material on record [Gunda\nSubbayya Vs. CIT, (1939) 7 ITR 21, 26-7 (Mad-- FB); CIT Vs. S. Sen,\n(1949) 17 ITR 355 (Orissa)].”\n3.3 A decision is in the case of CIT v/s Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog (2002)\n256 ITR 243 (Raj):\nHowever, your honor shall find that the lower authorities in the present\ncase have not conformed to these settled principles by the courts, while\nmaking the impugned assessment u/s 144. Henc…

VIMLADEVI AGROTECH LIMITED ,KOTA vs. ACIT, WD -1(2), KOTA, KOTA

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.

…33) 1 ITR 375, 378 (Oudh)]. A best judgment assessment is not by way penalty for non-compliance [Jot Ram Sher Singh Vs. CIT, (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All) and it cannot be made capriciously in utter disregard to the material on record [Gunda Subbayya Vs. CIT, (1939) 7 ITR 21, 26-7 (Mad-- FB); CIT Vs. S. Sen, (1949) 17 ITR 355 (Orissa)].” 3.3 A decision is in the case of CIT v/s Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog (2002) 256 ITR 243 (Raj): However, your honor shall find that the lower authorities in the present case have not conformed to these settled principles by the courts, while making the impugned assessment u/s 144. Hence, t…