Harish Textile Engrs. Ltd. v. DCIT

379 ITR 160High Court2015#4210 most cited

What is Harish Textile Engrs. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Income can be added on the basis of estimation or guesswork, extrapolating from evidence found during a search or seizure, even if the exact details for the entire period are not available.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Harish Textile Engrs. Ltd. v. DCIT · section 132 · section 132(4A) · on money receipt · dumb documents · loose papers · estimate of income · search and seizure · block period · addition to income

Also reported as

236 Taxmann 420

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 132(4A)Section 292CSection 133ASection 40A(3)Section 131Section 132(4)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 181section 114(e)section 23(3)on money receiptdumb documentssection 132(4a)percentage completion methodon-moneysection 131(1a)circle ratesection 292cloose papers

Judgments citing Harish Textile Engrs. Ltd. v. DCIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. A.Sivasankar, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 952/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

DCIT, Chennai vs. A.Sivasankar, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 951/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 620/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 619/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 618/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 617/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…e to other plots also. In this regard, the following judicial decisions are considered. The Courts have not favoured extrapolation of sale consideration in cases of differential pricing by builders and developers. In the case of Barish Textiles Engineers Ltd (379 ITR 160), the Bombay High Court has not favoured extrapolation of on money received on sale of Stenter Machines for the block period when certain amounts had been added to the assessee's income on account of evidence of on money received. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd (215 Taxman 659), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additio…

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad vs. Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…T [2005] 91 TTJ (Delhi) 938; - Pr. CIT v. Ajanta Footcare (India) (P.) Ltd. [20171 84 taxmann.com 109fCal.): - Dy. CIT v. C, Krishna Yadav f20111 12 taxmann.com 4/T20111 46 SOT250(Hvd.)(URO); - Harish Textile Engineers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [20151 63 taxmanrLCom 66/379 ITR 160/r2016] 236 Taxman 420(Bom): - CIT v. Jai Pal Aggarwal [20121 28 taxmann.com 269/T20131 212 Taxman 1 (Delhi) 6.73 Therefore the well settled legal position is that a non-speaking document referred to as a "Dumb Document" without any corroborative material, evidence on record and finding that such document has materialized into transactions giving…

Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 182/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…T [2005] 91 TTJ (Delhi) 938; - Pr. CIT v. Ajanta Footcare (India) (P.) Ltd. [20171 84 taxmann.com 109fCal.): - Dy. CIT v. C, Krishna Yadav f20111 12 taxmann.com 4/T20111 46 SOT250(Hvd.)(URO); - Harish Textile Engineers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [20151 63 taxmanrLCom 66/379 ITR 160/r2016] 236 Taxman 420(Bom): - CIT v. Jai Pal Aggarwal [20121 28 taxmann.com 269/T20131 212 Taxman 1 (Delhi) 6.73 Therefore the well settled legal position is that a non-speaking document referred to as a "Dumb Document" without any corroborative material, evidence on record and finding that such document has materialized into transactions giving…