ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah

218 ITR 239Supreme Court of India1996#669 most cited

What is ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah authority for?

Under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer must tax any taxable income in the hands of the correct assessee to whom it truly belongs, having no option to assess it in any other person's hands.

149

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah · 218 ITR 239 · 84 Taxmann 630 · correct assessee · right person taxation · Assessing Officer's duty · unexplained money · unexplained investment · section 69A · section 132(4) · assessment of income · identification of real owner

Also reported as

84 Taxmann 630

Sections most often in play

Section 69ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 142(1)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 144BSection 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 271fsection 139(4)section 292csection 292section 271asection 29loose papersunexplained investmentunexplained moneysection 132(4)double taxationsection 23

Judgments citing ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah

Hcl Employees & Investment Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-2(6), New Delhi

ITA 6874/DEL/1995[1989-90]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2025AY 1989-90

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 1989-90 Vs. M/S. Acit, Associated Techno Circle-1(2), Plastics (P.) Ltd., New Delhi S-15, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca2525K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 1989-90 Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Hcl Employees & Investment Co. Ltd., (Appeals)-X, 808, Sidharth 96, New Delhi Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan: Aaach1240G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. D.S. Sidhu, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm The Instant Batch Of Two Appeals Pertain To As Many Assessees Herein M/S. Associated Techno Plastics (P.) Ltd. & M/S. Hcl Employees & Investment Co. Ltd. The Revenue Has Filed

Section 143(3)Section 69

…in the assessment order or in the CIT(A)’s order herein as to how and in what manner the assessee has been held to have acquired title of the shares sold in the relevant previous year. There could be hardly any dispute going by the ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah [1996] 218 ITR 239 (SC) that any taxable income has to be assessed in the correct assessee’s hands only. We thus, deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the learned CIT(A) for his 4 | P a g e ITA No. 7444/Del/1992 & 6874/Del/1995 afresh appropriate adjudication after examining the assessee’s title o…

Sant Kumar Suri, Nurpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 336/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

…mount pertains to opening balances in capital account a/c for the year in question and examination of the same can not be made in assessment for the year in question. It is a settled proposition of law by number of decisions including in ITO Vs. Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239 (SC) that AO must tax right income in the right year. This is without prejudice to the fact that addition on this issue can not even be made in the earlier year(s).+ d. Therefore, it is prayed that this issue may please be dropped in these proceedings.2.2 Arguments on why mismatch in opening stock is not unexplained. a. In the subject notice, you…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Gopu Rajagopal, Chennai

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections

ITA 1811/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 132(4)Section 69A

…ully refer to the following observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs Ch. Atchiah (218 ITR 23 Ch. Atchiah (218 ITR 239) wherein it was held as under: wherein it was held as under:- “Under the 1961 Act, the Assessing Officer has no option like the one he Under the 1961 Act, the Assessing Officer has no option like the one he Under the 1961 Act, the Assessing Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person an…

Sri. D. K Shivakumar, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru

ITA 1064/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan Kassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: S/ShriFor Respondent: Shri.Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 292CSection 69ASection 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. D. K. Shivakumar, Vs. DCIT, No.252, “Kenkkeri” 18th Cross, Circle – 1(4), Upper Palace Orchards, Bangalore. Sadashivanagar, Bangalore – 560 080. PAN : AKKPS 1306 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : S/Shri. Chandrasekhar and Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue by : Shri.Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel. Date of hearing : 10.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member This is an appeal…

Cholan Auto Finance, Karur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle 2), Trichy, Tiruchirappalli

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1155/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1155 & 1156/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-2019 M/S. Cholan Auto Finance, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 43, Padma Tower, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle 2, Covai Road, Trichy. Karur 639 002. आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1191 & 1192/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-2019 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Cholan Auto Finance, Income Tax, 43, Padma Tower, 3Rd Floor, Vs Central Circle 2, . Covai Road, Trichy. Karur 639 002. [Pan : Aagfc 1043B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri N.V.Balaji, Advocate Department By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2024 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Arising Out Of The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 19, Chennai [Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri N.V.Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…The ld.AR argued that this is not permissible under the law as it is contradicting to the stand taken by the revenue during the assessment of earlier search. He further relied on the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch.Atchaiah[1996]218 ITR 239, to support his contention that the income of some other person cannot be added in the hands of one ITA No.1155, 1156, 1191 & 1192/Chny/2024 person. He also submitted that ld.CIT(A) also grossly erred in upholding the action of the AO in making addition of entire income of the group in the hands of assessee. 35. The Ld AR, in his submission, stat…

Covai Marketing, Salem vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 745/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.701, 743 To 745/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S. Covai Marketing, The Dcit, 16/30, Meyyanur Road, Circle-1(1), Salem-636 004. Salem. [Pan: Aagfc 9345 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

…ted in the name of Firm, but that can’t be the sole reason for saddling the income of another person as noted supra. And its settled position of law that assessment should be made in the Right-hands/person, Right-year, Right-income [refer ITO vs Ch.Atchaiah 218 ITR 239(SC)] Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case as noted (supra), the addition made by the AO on the cash deposits during demonetization as well as the estimated ITA Nos.701, 743 to 745/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. Covai Marketing :: 13 :: income on turnover can’t be sustained because it would tantamount to double taxation of the same income,…

Covai Marketing, Salem vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 744/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.701, 743 To 745/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S. Covai Marketing, The Dcit, 16/30, Meyyanur Road, Circle-1(1), Salem-636 004. Salem. [Pan: Aagfc 9345 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

…ted in the name of Firm, but that can’t be the sole reason for saddling the income of another person as noted supra. And its settled position of law that assessment should be made in the Right-hands/person, Right-year, Right-income [refer ITO vs Ch.Atchaiah 218 ITR 239(SC)] Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case as noted (supra), the addition made by the AO on the cash deposits during demonetization as well as the estimated ITA Nos.701, 743 to 745/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. Covai Marketing :: 13 :: income on turnover can’t be sustained because it would tantamount to double taxation of the same income,…

Covai Marketing, Salem vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 743/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.701, 743 To 745/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S. Covai Marketing, The Dcit, 16/30, Meyyanur Road, Circle-1(1), Salem-636 004. Salem. [Pan: Aagfc 9345 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

…ted in the name of Firm, but that can’t be the sole reason for saddling the income of another person as noted supra. And its settled position of law that assessment should be made in the Right-hands/person, Right-year, Right-income [refer ITO vs Ch.Atchaiah 218 ITR 239(SC)] Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case as noted (supra), the addition made by the AO on the cash deposits during demonetization as well as the estimated ITA Nos.701, 743 to 745/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. Covai Marketing :: 13 :: income on turnover can’t be sustained because it would tantamount to double taxation of the same income,…

Covai Marketing, Salem vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem

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

ITA 701/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.701, 743 To 745/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S. Covai Marketing, The Dcit, 16/30, Meyyanur Road, Circle-1(1), Salem-636 004. Salem. [Pan: Aagfc 9345 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

…ted in the name of Firm, but that can’t be the sole reason for saddling the income of another person as noted supra. And its settled position of law that assessment should be made in the Right-hands/person, Right-year, Right-income [refer ITO vs Ch.Atchaiah 218 ITR 239(SC)] Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case as noted (supra), the addition made by the AO on the cash deposits during demonetization as well as the estimated ITA Nos.701, 743 to 745/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. Covai Marketing :: 13 :: income on turnover can’t be sustained because it would tantamount to double taxation of the same income,…

M/S. Nabadurga Minerals, Rairangpur vs. ACIT, Circle, Balasore

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 112/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

M/S. Nabadurga Minerals, Rairangpur vs. ACIT, Circle, Balasore

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 111/CTK/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

ACIT, Balasore Circle, Balasore vs. M/S. Nabadurga Minerals, Rairangpur

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 461/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

ACIT, Balasore Circle, Balasore vs. Mr. Birat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 460/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

ACIT, Balesore Circle, Baleswar vs. M/S. Nabadurga Minerals, Rairangpur

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 387/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

ACIT, Balesore Circle, Baleswar vs. M/S. Nabadurga Minerals, Rairangpur

In the result, appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 386/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment : 2008-2009) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs Mr. Biirat Chandra Dagara, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aecpd 7343 D & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.461, 386 & 387/Ctk/2019 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Vs M/S Nabbadurga Minerals, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aaabfn 8099 H & आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita Nos.111 & 112/Ctk/2020 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / A.Yrs. : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011) वष" M/S Nabadurga Minerals, Vs Acit, Circle, Balasore Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj Pan No. :Aabfn 8099 H (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" .. राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2024 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 30.08.2019 & 30.09.2019, For The Assessment Years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 & 2010- 2011, Respectively. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.460/Ctk/2019 In The Case Of Birat Chandra Dagara For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Initially Has Taken Certain & Ita Nos.111&112/Ctk/2020

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 90

…m No.H-1 & H-9 submitted before Deputy Director of Mines by the assessee himself, (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack was not justified in ignoring the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO -v- Ch. Atchaiah (218 ITR 239) which does not preclude the Assessing Officer from taxing a right person even if the income has already been taxed in the hands of wrong person. (5) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), Cuttack had also erred in applying the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -v- Wine Chamber (195 ITR 195) in spite of th…

ITO, Angul Ward, Angul vs. M/S. Ncc Smasl Jrt(Jv), Angul

ITA 99/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor and Bibhu Jain, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 40A(2)(b)

…urt In the matter of ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239 shall not be applicable because in lTO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239the apex court did not decide the question that "Whether assessee can be regarded as Association of Person or notr 'Whereas in ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239 it was not disputed that the assessee (in ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239) was an AOP. But in the instant case the, inter-alia, issue before your goodself is that Co. No.27/CTK/2018 whether the assessee can be treated as ADP for the purpose of section 2(31) of the Act. From the ratios of the aforesaid judgments mentioned in para-8 it is evident tha…

ITO, Angul Ward, Angul vs. Ncc-Smasl-Jrt(Jv), Angul

ITA 39/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor and Bibhu Jain, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 40A(2)(b)

…urt In the matter of ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239 shall not be applicable because in lTO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239the apex court did not decide the question that "Whether assessee can be regarded as Association of Person or notr 'Whereas in ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239 it was not disputed that the assessee (in ITO v. ChAtchaiah 218 ITR 239) was an AOP. But in the instant case the, inter-alia, issue before your goodself is that Co. No.27/CTK/2018 whether the assessee can be treated as ADP for the purpose of section 2(31) of the Act. From the ratios of the aforesaid judgments mentioned in para-8 it is evident tha…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Projects Pvt Ltd, Kurnool

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 1763/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. Flat No.40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Income Tax, Circle – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. 40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Cross Applicant) (Respondent/Assessee) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.AR
Section 10BSection 154Section 250

…counting time period principle. The Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the income to be assessed in the hands of right person and in the right year. Tax neutrality plays no role in income Tax Assessment as held in the case of CIT Vs Ch.Atchaiah (SC) 218 ITR 239. 5. Any other additional ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 2.2 The additional grounds raised by the Revenue reads as under : “6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A), while deleting the disallowance of trade discount, erred in not considering that trade discounts are granted by way of deduction in invoice value only and never appear in the bo…

Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Projects Pvt Ltd., Kurnool vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kurnool

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 615/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. Flat No.40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Income Tax, Circle – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. 40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Cross Applicant) (Respondent/Assessee) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.AR
Section 10BSection 154Section 250

…counting time period principle. The Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the income to be assessed in the hands of right person and in the right year. Tax neutrality plays no role in income Tax Assessment as held in the case of CIT Vs Ch.Atchaiah (SC) 218 ITR 239. 5. Any other additional ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 2.2 The additional grounds raised by the Revenue reads as under : “6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A), while deleting the disallowance of trade discount, erred in not considering that trade discounts are granted by way of deduction in invoice value only and never appear in the bo…

Danalaxmi Jewellers (India) Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Cororae Circle-1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 471/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Chny/2023 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A IJFor Respondent: Shri P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 72A(6)

…e contention of appellant . The assessee on hand is claiming set off of loss of stolen gold from the current income, however not offering in the income on the recovery the stolen goods. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of ITO vs. Ch. :- 4 -: Atchaiah [1996] 218 ITR 239 (SC), has held that the AO must tax the right person alone. Merely because a wrong person is taxed with respect to a particular income, the AO is not precluded from taxing the right person with respect to that income. Further, the person lawfully liable to be taxed can claim no immunity because the AO has taxed the said income in the hands of a…