Income Tax Officer v. R.L. Rajghoria

119 ITR 872High Court1979#3336 most cited

What is Income Tax Officer v. R.L. Rajghoria authority for?

An Assessing Officer errs by ignoring detailed explanations and documentary evidence provided by the assessee and proceeding to a conclusion without considering such submissions.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Income Tax Officer v. R.L. Rajghoria · 119 ITR 872 · ignored explanation · ignored documentary evidence · Assessing Officer error · CIT(A) error · assessment procedure

Judgments citing Income Tax Officer v. R.L. Rajghoria

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAJESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/26/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR PERIWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/136/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. SRI SATYA NARAYAN SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/168/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. JEMISH SHAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/57/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUKESH SARAOGI (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/76/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, KOLKATA vs. MUKTA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/44/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,BURDWAN vs. BIJAYA TAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/122/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. PRAKASHO DEVI SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/138/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA vs. KRISHNA KUMAR PARSURAMKA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/130/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAKESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/27/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. AAYUSH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/88/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/41/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BABITA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/64/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18, KOLKATA vs. SRI VIKASH GOEL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/85/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PR CIT 9, KOLKATA vs. MANISHA TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/155/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-SILIGURI vs. SHEKHAR AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/139/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9, KOLKATA vs. PUSPA DEVI TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/150/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, KOLKATA vs. GITESH TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/154/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. POOJA JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/87/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13 KOLKATA vs. SMT GANAPATI DEVI AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/34/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…sessee. Further the assessee had given a detailed explanation on 15.11.2017 which has been completely ignored by the Assessing Officer. The contention raised by the assessee before the 73 (1979) 119 ITR 872 (Cal) 74 (1982) 135 ITR 313 (Cal) 75 (2004) 186 CTR Del 659 76 AIR 2003 SC 3184 ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 65 of 150 Assessing Officer was reiterated before the CIT(A), which has been noted in paragraph 4.2 of his order. That apart in paragraph 4.3, the CIT(A) notes that documents were produced by the assessee. However, i…

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

Income Tax Officer v. R.L. Rajghoria (119 ITR 872) — Cited in 35 Judgments | BharatTax