What is H.R. Mehta v. ACIT authority for?

An assessment order is unsustainable if the Assessing Officer denies the assessee the opportunity to cross-examine deponents whose statements are relied upon or fails to provide the material used against them, as this violates principles of natural justice.

How many judgments cite H.R. Mehta v. ACIT?

175 judgments on BharatTax cite H.R. Mehta v. ACIT (387 ITR 561), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does H.R. Mehta v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 153A, Section 245D(4), Section 245D(6B), Section 69.

H.R. Mehta v. ACIT (387 ITR 561)

Shri Tes Fathu Rabbani, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 106/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3272/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3271/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3270/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT< Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3269/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3268/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Shri Naiina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

In the result all the captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are allowed

ITA 3267/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner Of Kareem, Vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House Of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-Pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [Pan:Ahdps-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153ASection 245D(4)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3267, 3268 & 3272/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Shri. Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul The Assistant Commissioner of Kareem, vs. Income Tax, Survey No.-338/3, House of Seyad, Central Circle 1, North By-pass Road, Madurai. Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli - 627 003. [PAN:AHDPS-2976-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Resp…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6281/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s cross examination of the person on whose statement the AO relied upon, granted, then, such deficiencies would amount to denial of opportunity and consequently would be fatal to the proceedings. c) Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta vs ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) has also considered the issue of not providing opportunity of cross examination in para 11 to 17 and held that the denial of opportunity to cross examine goes to the root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the assessment and, therefore, renders the assessment order passed by the AO not sustainable. 9. As per the facts of…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6280/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s cross examination of the person on whose statement the AO relied upon, granted, then, such deficiencies would amount to denial of opportunity and consequently would be fatal to the proceedings. c) Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta vs ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) has also considered the issue of not providing opportunity of cross examination in para 11 to 17 and held that the denial of opportunity to cross examine goes to the root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the assessment and, therefore, renders the assessment order passed by the AO not sustainable. 9. As per the facts of…

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6279/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s cross examination of the person on whose statement the AO relied upon, granted, then, such deficiencies would amount to denial of opportunity and consequently would be fatal to the proceedings. c) Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta vs ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) has also considered the issue of not providing opportunity of cross examination in para 11 to 17 and held that the denial of opportunity to cross examine goes to the root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the assessment and, therefore, renders the assessment order passed by the AO not sustainable. 9. As per the facts of…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal, Nagpur

ITA 109/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 10(38)Section 68

…en done by the Assessing Officer. In support of his arguments, the learned Counsel relied on the following case laws:–  Andaman Timber Industries v/s Commissioner of Central Excise (SC).  CIT Vs. Sunita Dhadda (SC) SLP 9432/2018  H.R Mehta Vs. ACIT (2016) 387 ITR 561 (Bombay HC) 16. The judicial pronouncements relied upon by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order have no bearing on the case as the same are an entirely different set of facts and circumstances. 10 Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal ITA no.109/Nag./2019 17. The purchase of shares in physical form is no bar under SEBI Regulation Act which…

Satelite Trade Impex Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 912/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon'Ble Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ross examination of the person on whose statement the AO relied upon, granted, then, such deficiencies would amount to denial of opportunity and consequently would be fatal to the proceedings. c) The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta vs ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) has also considered the issue of not providing opportunity of cross examination in para 11 to 17 and held that the denial of opportunity to cross examine goes to the root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the assessment and, therefore, renders the assessment order passed by the AO not sustainable. 17. We are of the view…

DCIT CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Ltd, Kurla, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3802/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh and Shri A. Pawar ARsFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)

…sessee are genuine and has not indulged in any malpractice while transacting business with the assessee. 7.2In this regard, the ld. Counsel has also cited certain judicial decisions in support of the above arguments. In the case of H.R. Mehta Vs. ACIT [2016] 387 ITR 561(Bombay) [30-06-2016]where assessee had taken loan from one and Assessing Officer added loan. amount in income of assessee under section 68 on basis that no confirmation letter had been obtained from, since loan was advanced and repaid vide account payee cheques, Assessing Officer should have provided assessee material used against him apart from…

Taruna Manish Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the asesssee stands allowed

ITA 1629/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Ito, Ward-22(3)(4) Tarun Manish Jain Plot No. 117, Prabhat Colony, Santacruz (E) Maharashtra – 400055. Pan/Gir No. Aczpj4618A (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 68

…aruna Manish Jain, Mumbai relied upon paper book containing loan confirmation document, bank statement and submissions made before the AO for seeking permission for cross examination and also relied upon the following decisions: 1. H R Mehta Vs. ACIT (2016) 387 ITR 561 (Bombay HC) 2. PCIT Vs. M/s. Skylark Build (ITA No. 616 of 2016) Bombay HC. 3. CIT Vs. Ambe Tradingcorp (P) Ltd (2023) 209 taxman 471 (Gujarat HC) 4. CIT Vs. Kapoor Chand Mangesh Chand (2013) 218 taxman 157. 5. M/s Savita mercantile Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO (ITA No. 168/M/2023) 3. Whereas on the contrary the Ld.DR supported the orders of the revenue auth…

Gopalsamy, Chennai vs. CIT(A)-18, Chennai

The appeals stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1384/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1384/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1385/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1386/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Gopalsamy Vs. Acit No.3B, 3Rd Floor New No.27 Dc/Ac Central Cir 1(2) East Street, Krishna Apartments, Chennai Raghava Reddy Colony, Ashok Nagar, Chennai 600 083. [Pan: Bjtpg 4193H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Subramanian, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Subramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 153CSection 253

…give the Assessee an opportunity to controvert evidence and cross examine the evidence on which the department places its reliance. A failure in providing the same would result in the order being a nullity. The Bombay High Court in H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT (2016) 387 ITR 561 (Bom.)(HC) similarly observed that AO was bound to be provided with the material used against him apart from being permitting him to cross-examine the deponents. 14. Considering all these facts, the source to the extent of Rs.19,82,600/- is to be accepted. We order so. The addition as sustained in impugned order stand deleted. Ashok Nagar propert…

Om Shanti Reltors, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-20(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with above directions for statistical purposes

ITA 4113/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharshi & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhanom Shanti Realtors Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- Omkar House, Off Eastern 20(2)(3) Highway, Opp. Sion Chunnabhatti 2Nd Floor, 210, Piramal Signal, Sion East, Mumbai – 400 Chambers, Parel, Mumbai – 022. 400 012. Pan: Aabfo1844K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…d upon the following citations: - a. PCIT Vs. Ambe Tradecorp (P.) Ltd. [2023] 290 Taxman 471 (Gujrat) [05-07-2022]. b. DCIT Vs. Shri Jayesh R. Thakkar, ITA No. 3407/AHD/2015, A.Y. 2011-12, dated 16.10.2023, (Ahmd-Trib). c. H.R. Mehta Vs. ACIT, (Bombay)[2016] 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) [30.06.2016] d. CIT Vs. Kapoor Chand Mangesh Chand, [2013] 218 Taxman 157 (Allahabad) (Mag.) e. Pr. CIT Vs. M/s. Skylark Build ITXA No. 616 of 2016, dated 24.10.2018, (Bom-HC). f. ACIT-24(3) Vs. Shri. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, ITA No. 3091 to 3096/M/2017, dated 15/11/2017, (Mum-Trib). 13. In addition, the assessee/appellant has also re…

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO 7(3), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 369/JPR/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Soni (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69B

…to give the Assessee an opportunity to controvert evidence and cross examine the evidence on which the department places its reliance. A failure in providing the same can result in the order being a nullity. The Bombay High Court in H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT (2016) 387 ITR 561 (Bom.)(HC) has held that while making addition under s. 68, the A.O. had relied upon some evidence collected in that behalf including statement on oath said to have been made on behalf of persons whose identity was not disclosed. It was held that assessee was bound to be provided with the material used against him apart from being permitting him…

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. ITO, WD 7(3), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 366/JPR/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2024AY 2007-2008

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Soni (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69B

…to give the Assessee an opportunity to controvert evidence and cross examine the evidence on which the department places its reliance. A failure in providing the same can result in the order being a nullity. The Bombay High Court in H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT (2016) 387 ITR 561 (Bom.)(HC) has held that while making addition under s. 68, the A.O. had relied upon some evidence collected in that behalf including statement on oath said to have been made on behalf of persons whose identity was not disclosed. It was held that assessee was bound to be provided with the material used against him apart from being permitting him…

M/S. White Willow, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 370/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.370/Srt/2022 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S White Willow Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat, Vishram Apartment, Opp. Vs Anavil Business Centre, Sawlani Estate Bungalows, Pal Hazira Road, Adajan, Beside Trinidhi Apartment, Surat-395007 Ghod Dod Road, Regent Mall, Surat-395007 Pan No. Aabfw 4804 F ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…assessee. To support such view, Ld. senior counsel for the assessee relied in the following case las:  Kishnchand Chellaram 125 IDTR 713 (SC)  Heirs and Legal Representative of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel vs. CIT (2008) 327 ITR 290 (Guj)  H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bom) 10. The learned Senior Counsel for the assessee submits that neither the statement referred and relied by assessing officer were provided to the assessee nor the assessee was offered any opportunity for cross-examination of such persons, whose statement was made basis for making addition. It is a settled law that in absence of cross-examina…

Cci Logistics Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 593/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…he addition and therefore on that basis too the addition deserved to be deleted by relying on the following decisions: i) Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006 (2015) 324 E.L.T 641 (SC) ii) H R Mehta vs. ACIT 387 ITR 561, Bombay High Court iii) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396 Delhi High Court iv) CIT vs. SMC Share Brokers Ltd. 288 ITR 345 Delhi High Court v) CIT vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises (1994) 210 ITR 103, 111 (cal) The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be reversed and AO may be directed to delete the addition. 7. The…

H.R. Mehta v. ACIT

What is H.R. Mehta v. ACIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing H.R. Mehta v. ACIT

Shri Tes Fathu Rabbani, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Nawaz, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT< Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Vannarpettai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Shri Naiina Mohamed Seyad Abdul Kareem, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Madurai

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

Indravadan Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Circle 42(2)(1), Mumbai

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal, Nagpur

Satelite Trade Impex Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 5(3)(1), Mumbai

DCIT CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Ltd, Kurla, Mumbai

Taruna Manish Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

Gopalsamy, Chennai vs. CIT(A)-18, Chennai

Om Shanti Reltors, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-20(2)(3), Mumbai

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO 7(3), Jaipur

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. ITO, WD 7(3), Jaipur

M/S. White Willow, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat

Cci Logistics Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), Kolkata