(i) Andman Timber Industries v. CCE (

403 ITR 183Reported decision#3387 most cited

What is (i) Andman Timber Industries v. CCE ( authority for?

Third-party statements cannot be used against an assessee without providing an opportunity for cross-examination. This ensures adherence to principles of natural justice.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Andman Timber Industries · natural justice · cross-examination · third party statements · assessment proceedings · evidence · violation of natural justice · departmental reliance on third party evidence · natural justice in tax law

Sections most often in play

Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

Issues it is cited on

principal chief commissioner of income-taxthird party informationsection 50c(1)section 50c(2)peak credit theorysection 142afaceless assessment schemefull value of considerationsection 120section 151aviolation of natural justiceorder under section 148a(d)

Judgments citing (i) Andman Timber Industries v. CCE (

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Ramesh Kumar Mantri, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 165/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Ramesh Kumar Mantri, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 164/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Anshul Jain, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 163/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukesh Jain, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 162/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukesh Jain, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 161/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Smt. Sangeeta Mantri, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 160/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Smt. Asha Jain, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 159/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Smt. Sunita Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 158/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Smt. Sunita Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 157/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Smt. Sunita Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 156/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukut Behari Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 155/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukut Behari Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 153/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

ACIT, CC-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Mukut Behari Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 152/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

…mmissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal being concurrent factual findings - Whether no substantial question of law arose from impugned order of Tribunal - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee] 7.3 Sunita Dhadda, order dated 28.03.2018, SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (403 ITR 183) The ratio laid down by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench as below was upheld: “Their Lordships ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and ROHINTON FALL NARIMAN Ji.- dismissed the Department's special leave petition against judgment dated July 31, 2017, of the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.-B,L_TA. No. 197 of 2012 whereb…

Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, Masuda Bijainagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Beawar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 910/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Ms Savita Bundas (CIT)
Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’A’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 910/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, ITO Vs. 109, Sabji Mandi, Ward No. Ward- 1, 9,Mausda Bijainagar, Beawar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHDPT 3045 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 819/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke IT…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Beawar vs. Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, Masuda Bijainagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 819/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Ms Savita Bundas (CIT)
Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’A’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 910/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke Shri Manoj Amar Chand Tailor, ITO Vs. 109, Sabji Mandi, Ward No. Ward- 1, 9,Mausda Bijainagar, Beawar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHDPT 3045 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 819/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke IT…