J R Solvent Industries (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

24 DTR 387Reported decision#20031 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69CSection 1961Section 250 of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

genuineness of the transactionundisclosed incomesection 68section 143(2)personcompanysection 143(3)indiatotal incomebusinessdocument

Judgments citing J R Solvent Industries (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

Arun Kumar Gupta, DCIT, Circle-1(3), Surat, Adajan vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Adarsh Nagar Society

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 779/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250

…(ii) CIT vs. Jitendra Dalpatbhai Shah, Tax Appeal No. 1414 of 2011; (iii) Acchyalal Shaw, 30 SOT-44 (Kolkata); (iv) Sunita Oberoi, 126 TTJ 745 (Agra); (v) Baijnath Agarwal, 43 TTJ 149 (Agra); (vi) Ajay Nawandar, 3 DTR 452 (Mum); (vii) J.R Solvent Inidustries, 24 DTR 387 (Chandigarh); (viii) Chandresh Kumar Maheshwari, 29 SOT 58 (Jodhpur Bench); (ix) Smt. Bibi Rani Bansal, 43 DTR 279 (TM); (x) H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd., 325 ITR 316 (Del); (xi) Nisraj Real Estate & Export (P.) Ltd., 31 DTR 456 (Jaipur); (xii) Pravin Electronics Ltd., 16 DTR 321 (Del); (xiii) Mukesh R. Maroliya, 6 SOT 247 (Mumbai Tribunal); (xiv) Rit…

Arun Kumar Gupta, DCIT, Circle-1(3), Surat, Adajan vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Adarsh Nagar Society

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 778/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250

…(ii) CIT vs. Jitendra Dalpatbhai Shah, Tax Appeal No. 1414 of 2011; (iii) Acchyalal Shaw, 30 SOT-44 (Kolkata); (iv) Sunita Oberoi, 126 TTJ 745 (Agra); (v) Baijnath Agarwal, 43 TTJ 149 (Agra); (vi) Ajay Nawandar, 3 DTR 452 (Mum); (vii) J.R Solvent Inidustries, 24 DTR 387 (Chandigarh); (viii) Chandresh Kumar Maheshwari, 29 SOT 58 (Jodhpur Bench); (ix) Smt. Bibi Rani Bansal, 43 DTR 279 (TM); (x) H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd., 325 ITR 316 (Del); (xi) Nisraj Real Estate & Export (P.) Ltd., 31 DTR 456 (Jaipur); (xii) Pravin Electronics Ltd., 16 DTR 321 (Del); (xiii) Mukesh R. Maroliya, 6 SOT 247 (Mumbai Tribunal); (xiv) Rit…

M/S Anantha Refinery Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1554/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

…from those three suppliers. One should admit that there cannot be any sales without corresponding purchases. In this connection, we would like to refer to the findings of the Hon'ble ITAT [SB], Chandigarh in the case of J R Solvent Industries (P) Ltd v. ACIT 24 DTR 387 wherein it has been observed that 'Purchases of raw material from an unidentified supplier cannot be treated as bogus when it is established from day-to-day records that the said quantity went into production and the production and sales have been accepted by the Department'. Ostensibly, the books of accounts of the assessee for both the AYs under…

M/S Anantha Refinery Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1553/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

…from those three suppliers. One should admit that there cannot be any sales without corresponding purchases. In this connection, we would like to refer to the findings of the Hon'ble ITAT [SB], Chandigarh in the case of J R Solvent Industries (P) Ltd v. ACIT 24 DTR 387 wherein it has been observed that 'Purchases of raw material from an unidentified supplier cannot be treated as bogus when it is established from day-to-day records that the said quantity went into production and the production and sales have been accepted by the Department'. Ostensibly, the books of accounts of the assessee for both the AYs under…

J R Solvent Industries (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (24 DTR 387) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax