(iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT

Q: How many judgments cite (iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT?

54 judgments on BharatTax cite (iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT (327 ITR 290), spanning 2018 to 2025.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does (iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 1961, Section 115BBE, Section 131, Section 10(38).

327 ITR 290High Court2010#2130 most cited

What is (iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT authority for?

Additions to income based on statements recorded without providing the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the declarants are unsustainable due to a violation of natural justice principles.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Heirs and LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel v. CIT · violation of natural justice · opportunity of cross-examination · statement recorded without furnishing · assessment procedure

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 1961 Section 115BBE Section 131 Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 106 section 142(3)section 114 third party information preponderance of probability legal representative retracted statement bogus ltcg live link best judgment assessment colourable device entry operator

Judgments citing (iv) HEIRS AND LRS OF LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT

Ardent Steels Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 337/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 337/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2020-21)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…125 ITR 713(SC). II. Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2017) 398 ITR 198 (Del.), SLP dismissed vide (2024) 461 ITR 339 (SC). III. ACIT vs Sun & Sun Inframetric P. Ltd. (2024) 460 ITR 258 (Chhattisgarh) IV. Heirs & LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S Patel vs CIT (2010) 327 ITR 290, 304(Guj.). 13. Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee had kept and deprived off the information and material used against it in spite of making specific requests, it tantamount to no proper / effective opportunity of being heard. It was the submission that ‘after giving opportunity of being heard’ means confronting the assessee with a view…

Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Cen. Cir-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 513 & 519 to 521/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Sunil Kumar Agarwal ACIT, Vs. 395, Narnoli Mansion, Outside Central Circle-2, Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABRPA9601M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITSS No. 03/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k…

Geeta Devi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO WD 1(4), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 450/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal heir Smt. Geeta Devi G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. S. B. Natani, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख /

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 450/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal Income Tax Officer, Vs. heir Smt. Geeta Devi Ward- 1(4), Jaipur G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh…

Surendra Pal Singh Sahni, Kota vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/JPR/2024[2005-06]Status: FixedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 450/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal Income Tax Officer, Vs. heir Smt. Geeta Devi Ward- 1(4), Jaipur G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh…

The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Morbi vs. M/S. Kishan Plus Minarals, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue (In ITA No

ITA 124/RJT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.124/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.02/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Acit, Cent.Cir.2 M/S.Kishan Plus Minerals बनाम Rajkot. Jetpar Road, Nr. Pavadiyali Temple, Jasmatgadh Vs. Morbi. Pan : Aaqfk4689P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Counsel राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2025 (Originally Heard Refixed On 05.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

…able against the assessee. Such presumption, even in the case of the assessee in whose case the document has been found during the course search, is rebuttable. The jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Laxmanbhai S. Patel vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 290 (Gujarat), had held that: “It is true that while deciding the reference under section 256(1), the Court is mainly concerned with the decisions on questions of law. If the question posed before the Court is purely a question of fact, the Court should not entertain the reference. However, if some basic principles of law or statutory or constitution…

Shri Sanjaybhai Ramjibhai Patel, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Bhavnagar

ITA 454/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 452/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri TusharHemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B ParmarFor Respondent: Shri B.P Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 68

…t decision in the case of Andaman Timber Industries (2015) 281 CTR 214 (SC, KishanchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) and the decision of jurisdictional Gujarat High Court in the case of LATE LAXMANBHAI S. PATEL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (2010) 327 ITR 290. 6. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - VI erred in law and on facts in passing appeal order wrongly relying on the decision of honorable Supreme Court in the case of SumtiDaya vs. CIT (1995) 80 TAXMANN 89 (SC) as the facts in that case was quite different from the case of appellant. 7. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appe…

Smt. Shital Sanjaybhai Patel, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Bhavnagar

ITA 453/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 452/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri TusharHemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B ParmarFor Respondent: Shri B.P Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 68

Shri Jignesh Ramjibhai Patel, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

ITA 452/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 452/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri TusharHemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B ParmarFor Respondent: Shri B.P Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 68

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 1463/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1463 to 1465/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 cuke Kailash Chand Maheshwari DCIT, Vs. 223 Kirti Nagar, Near Kamal and Central Circle-02, Company Tonk Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKQPM5593A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S. L.…

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Navnirman Co Op. Bank Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1974/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1974/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Dcit Navnirman Co-Op. Bank Ltd. बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(1) Navnirman Bhawan V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Opp. Hdfc Bank Ahmedabad City Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabfn 2975 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hem Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/05/2025

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…o addition can be made in the hands of assesse based on statement of third part unless the same is afforded to be cross examined. Appellant rely on the following judgments: (i) In the case of Heirs and Legal Representatives of Shri Laxrhanbhai S Patel vs CIT 327 ITR 290 (Guj), the Jurisdictional Gujarat High Court has observed that: The legal effect of the statement recorded behind the back of the assessee and without furnishing the copy thereof to the assessee or without giving an opportunity of cross-examination, if the addition is made, the same is required to be deleted on the ground of violation of the pri…

Pradeep Kumar Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle 2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

ITA 1192/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Parth Patni, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 131Section 153CSection 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,o a Jh jkBkMs deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1149/JPR/2024 fu/k Zkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 The ITO Ward-1(4), Jaipur cuke Vs. Shri Pradeep Kumar Dusad R-1. Behind Motor Aids Petrol Pump, Jhotwara Road, Shashtri Nagar, Jaiapur. LFkk;h y s[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABLPD4678H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;Fkh Z@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1192/JPR/2024 fu/k Zkj.k…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Jaipur vs. Shri Pradeep Kumar Dusad, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

ITA 1149/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Parth Patni, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 131Section 153CSection 250

Dayal Cotspin Limited, Akola vs. ACIT, Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 87/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 68

…[Vol.–I]. The addition made is not in accordance with law considering the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v/s CCE, [2015] 281 CTR 241 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Heirs and L.Rs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel, [2010] 327 ITR 290 (Guj.). Respectfully following the same, addition made in assessee’s case at ` 180 lakh is held to be unjustified and unsustainable. 18. It is also seen that the assessment year under consideration is assessment year 2012-13. The assessee has established identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of share capital by adducing legal evidence on re…

Deepak Kumar Shah, Ramganjmandi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 426/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 131Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC’’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 426/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Deepak Kumar Shah cuke The ITO Vs. Bazar No. 1, Ramganj Mandi Ward- Kota Kota -326 519 Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADDPK 1529 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri S.L. Poddar, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Volga International Ltd., Sarangpur

In the result appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1538/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 68

…2010-11 5 opportunity to cross examine the third party before using the statements to draw adverse inference against the assessee has been clarified in the following cases:- Andaman Timber Industries (2015) 62 Taxmann.com (SC) LRs of late Laxmanbhai S Patel 327 ITR 290 (Guj) Indrajit Suri (2013) 215 Taxman 581(Guj) Farrah Marker ITA No 3801/Mum/2011 dated 27-04-2016 Pratik Suryakant Shah 77 taxman.com 260 (2017) (Ahd trib) Rameshkumar Jain (HUF) (2013) 36 Taxmann.com 524(Jodhpur Trib) The ratio of decision of the Apex court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries (supra) and that of the other decisions is squa…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…one of the witnesses were examined before the A.O., and assessee did not have any opportunity to cross examine the statements given by the witnesses, addition cannot be made by AO.  Heirs and Legal Representatives of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel –vs.- CIT (2010) 327 ITR 290 (Guj.) [Addition made based on statement recorded without furnishing the same to the assessee or without giving him an opportunity to cross-examination was required to be deleted on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice] vi. Addition based on materials collected and statement recorded during survey u/s 133A are not sustain…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Deputy Commissionerof Income Tax, Circle -2, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

ACIT, C.C-2(1), Kolkata. vs. Shalimar Nutrients Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 550/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 550/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Shalimar Nutrients Private Limited Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata Vs 17Th Floor, Suite No. 17A, B & C Everest House 46/C, Chowringhee Road Middleton Street Kolkata - 700071 [Pan: Aapcs1419M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 20, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 1 Day In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record Explaining The Reasons. On Perusing The Same, We Are Convinced That The Revenue Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing This Appeal In Time. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…e by him…..” (iv) Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (2015) 281 CTR 241 (Hon’ble Supreme Court) (v) M/s R W Promotions (P) Ltd v. ACIT, Circle-9(3) in ITAT No. 1489 of 2013 (Hon’ble Bombay High Court) (vi) Heirs and LRs of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel v. CIR (2010) 327 ITR 290 (Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat) (vii) DCIT v. Mahendra Ambalal Patel (2010) 40 DTR (Guj) 243 Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat 9 I.T.A. No. 550/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shalimar Nutrients Private Limited 6. As far as to produce the director of M/s Pratik Merchants Pvt Ltd is concerned, it is submitted that the said company is our group com…

Sumit Goel, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 56Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;d lnL; ,o aJh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 8/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@AssessmentYears : 2012-13 Sumit Goel cuke Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 303, Krishna Kripa-3, Vs. Ward-4(5), Jaipur. Subhash Nagar, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADCPG 8949 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)& Shr…

M/S. White Willow, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 370/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.370/Srt/2022 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S White Willow Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat, Vishram Apartment, Opp. Vs Anavil Business Centre, Sawlani Estate Bungalows, Pal Hazira Road, Adajan, Beside Trinidhi Apartment, Surat-395007 Ghod Dod Road, Regent Mall, Surat-395007 Pan No. Aabfw 4804 F ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…were not admissible evidence against the assessee. To support such view, Ld. senior counsel for the assessee relied in the following case las:  Kishnchand Chellaram 125 IDTR 713 (SC)  Heirs and Legal Representative of Late Laxmanbhai S. Patel vs. CIT (2008) 327 ITR 290 (Guj)  H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT 387 ITR 561 (Bom) 10. The learned Senior Counsel for the assessee submits that neither the statement referred and relied by assessing officer were provided to the assessee nor the assessee was offered any opportunity for cross-examination of such persons, whose statement was made basis for making addition. It is a sett…