ITO v. Kenaram Saha & Subhash Saha (116 TTJ 289)

SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

ITA 422/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

…en not other addition can be made to the income of assessee. Similar view has been taken by the Special Bench (Kolkata) of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kenaram Sana & Subhash Saha (2008) 116 TTJ (Kol) (SB) 289; (2008) 8 DTR (Kol)(SB)(Trib) 124: (2008) 301 ITR 171 (Kol)(SB)(AT, wherein disallowance made in terms of s. 40A(3) has been deleted. Respectfully following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Inidwell Construction (supra), besides the Special Bench decision of this Tribunal noted above, we are of the considered opinion that the income of the assessee having been determined…

ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHOWDHURY, DURGAPUR

ITA 1810/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…en not other addition can be made to the income of assessee. Similar view has been taken by the Special Bench (Kolkata) of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kenaram Sana & Subhash Saha (2008) 116 TTJ (Kol) (SB) 289; (2008) 8 DTR (Kol)(SB)(Trib) 124: (2008) 301 ITR 171 (Kol)(SB)(AT, wherein disallowance made in terms of s. 40A(3) has been deleted. Respectfully following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Inidwell Construction (supra), besides the Special Bench decision of this Tribunal noted above, we are of the considered opinion that the income of the assessee having been determined…

ITO, WD-2(3), SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SMT SARATHI MAJUMDER, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part, and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1227/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…stimated, such assumption shall cover all the other addition made for bogus purchase and expenses disallowed, while holding reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Income-Tax Officer vs Kenaram Saha And Subhash Saha [2008] 301 ITR 171 (Kol). 7.1. Applying the propositions of law laid down by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Income-Tax Officer vs Kenaram Saha And Subhash Saha (supra), we uphold the contention of the assessee that, once the books of account have been rejected and the net profit has been estimated as a percentage of turnover by the Assessing Offi…

SMT SARATHI MAJUMDAR,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WD-2(3), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part, and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1116/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…stimated, such assumption shall cover all the other addition made for bogus purchase and expenses disallowed, while holding reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Income-Tax Officer vs Kenaram Saha And Subhash Saha [2008] 301 ITR 171 (Kol). 7.1. Applying the propositions of law laid down by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Income-Tax Officer vs Kenaram Saha And Subhash Saha (supra), we uphold the contention of the assessee that, once the books of account have been rejected and the net profit has been estimated as a percentage of turnover by the Assessing Offi…

NEERAJ PUROHIT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1037/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 37(1)(vii)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1037/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14. cuke Shri Neeraj Purohit, ACIT, Vs. A-153, Man Darpan Circle-4 Nehru Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AGSPP 2842 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Manish Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Da…

HARBANS LAL SETHI,JAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 495/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2017AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT-. DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES , JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 495, 496 & 497/JP/2013 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 cuke Shri Harbans Lal Sethi The Addl. CIT Vs. 97, Dushera Scheme, Kota Range-1, Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AJYPS 6625 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 2/JP/2014 & 823/JP/2014 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2010-11 cuke The ACIT Sh…

RATAN TAXTILES P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the

ITA 527/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

…wing case laws:- (i) Indwell Constructions v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 232 ITR 0776-[1998] (ii) 037 ITR 0369 Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT [Andhra Pradesh High Court] (iii) 36 DTR 220 Teja Constructions Vs. Asstt. CIT (Hyd. ‘A’) (iv) 116 TTJ 289 ITO Vs. Kenaram Saha & Subhash Saha (Kol.) (v) 58 DTR 368 ITO vs. Sadhwani Brotehrs (Jp 'B') (vi) Singhal Builders Contractor v. Addl. CIT [2011] 12 Taxman.com 199 (Jp. ITAT) (vii) [2011] 007 ITR (Trib) 0183 Reliable Surface Coatings Vs. ACIT. 11. On the contrary, the ld Sr.DR has vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. How…

MOHD. CONST. CO.,KOTA vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

ITA 649/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (Addl. CIT)

Section 145(3)Section 44A

…232 ITR 776 (AP), Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v/s CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP), ECI Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. in ITA No.2048/Hyd/2011, Samurai Techno Trading Co. (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (2010) 37 DTR 386 (Ker.), ITO v/s Kenaram Saha & Subhash Saha (2008) 116 TTJ 289 (Kol.) (SB). In this case the ld. CIT(A) made the estimation of NP @ 10.64% based on the adhoc addition on account of the alleged inflated consumption of material and thus again considered the same accounts already rejected, hence was not a good basis. The only course left after the rejection is a fair estimation taking relevant material into co…

ITO v. Kenaram Saha & Subhash Saha

Also reported as

Judgments citing ITO v. Kenaram Saha & Subhash Saha