ITO v. Ch. Atchiah

219 ITR 239Reported decision#15384 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69Section 132ASection 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 132aunexplained investmentsection 153cincriminating materialsearch and seizuresection 153asection 69section 132section 153section 13opportunity of being heardsection 15

Judgments citing ITO v. Ch. Atchiah

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAJESH MAFATLAL JAIN, MUMBAI

ITA 3954/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…has to be levied on right person, i.e, in the hands of the person who had actually made investment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:- "......We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By…

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAJESH MAFATLAL JAIN, MUMBAI

In the result, (a) the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2018-19 to 2020-21 are

ITA 3952/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…e investment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld Rajesh Jain ITA Nos. 3842 & 3841/MUM/2023 & ITA Nos. 3954, 3952, 3951 & 3950/MUM/2023 CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:- "......We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By "right person", we mean the person who is liable to be taxed, according to law, with res…

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAJESH MAFATLAL JAIN, MUMBAI

ITA 3951/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…investment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld Rajesh Jain 5 ITA Nos. 3842 & 3841/MUM/2023 & ITA Nos. 3954, 3952, 3951 & 3950/MUM/2023 CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:- "......We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By…

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAJESH MAFATLAL JAIN, MUMBAI

ITA 3950/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…vestment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld 4 Rajesh Jain 5 ITA Nos. 3842 & 3841/MUM/2023 & ITA Nos. 3954, 3952, 3951 & 3950/MUM/2023 CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:- "......We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By…

RAJESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, (a) the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2018-19 to 2020-21 are dismissed

ITA 3842/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…person who had actually made investment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld Rajesh Jain & ITA Nos. 3954, 3952, 3951 & 3950/MUM/2023 CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon‟ble Apex Court held as under:- “……We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By "right person", we mean the person who is liable to be taxed, according to law, with respe…

RAJESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, (a) the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2018-19 to 2020-21 are dismissed

ITA 3841/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69

…person who had actually made investment. We notice that the above said view taken by Ld Rajesh Jain & ITA Nos. 3954, 3952, 3951 & 3950/MUM/2023 CIT(A) would get support from the decision rendered by Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239)(SC), wherein the Hon‟ble Apex Court held as under:- “……We are of the opinion that under the present Act, the Income Tax Officer has no option like the one he had under the 1922 Act. He can, and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. By "right person", we mean the person who is liable to be taxed, according to law, with respe…

ITO v. Ch. Atchiah (219 ITR 239) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax