K.P. Varghese v. ITO

131 ITR 597Supreme Court of India1981#44 most cited

What is K.P. Varghese v. ITO authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

989

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2026.

Also referred to as

K.P. Varghese v. ITO · 131 ITR 597 · difference in valuation · unexplained investment · Valuation Officer report · deletion of addition · Assessing Officer enquiry · Section 69 · Section 69A · Section 115BBE · no addition on suspicion · understatement of consideration

Also reported as

7 Taxmann 13

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 292CSection 69Section 153CSection 115BBESection 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 52closely held companyaccumulated profitsdumb documentssection 132(4a)section 131(1a)section 260section 69bsection 292csection 292bsection 292

Judgments citing K.P. Varghese v. ITO

Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1061/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

…rom search and seizure perspective and such a non- speaking document are referred for initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. At this stage, it is appropriate to refer to the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri K.P. Verghese Vs. ITP (131 ITR 597), wherein held that fictional receipt cannot be deemed to be a receipt in the absence of cogent material to support the factum of actual receipt. Further, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. D.K. Gupta 174 Taxman 476, wherein held that adhoc/dumb documents without any corroborative evidence finding that the alleged documents have mate…

Deependra Singh, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(1) Mumbai, Bandra East

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2690/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledeependra Singh, Vs. Ito Ward-17(2)(1), 504 Pushpa Kunj, Kautaliya Bhavan, A Road,Marine Lines, Bandra East, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400050. Pan/Gir No. : Akips3319N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri H.N.Motiwalla.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.D.Chougle. Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…essed for stamp duty purposes" This being benevolent circular is binding as per following judgements of the Supreme Court: (i) Navnit Lal C. Javeri Vs. K.K. Sen [56 ITR198(SC)] (ii) Ellernan Lines Ltd. vs. CIT [82 ITR 913 (SC)] iii) K.P. Varghese Vs. ITO [131 ITR 597(SC)] Deependra Singh, Mumbai. (iv) UCO Bank Vs. CIT [237 ITR 889 (SC)] Hence we request you to give effect to the same, following the circular and aforesaid judgments Whereas the AO was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt at Para 5.1 to 5.5 of the order and assessed the total income of Rs.99,60,580/-and passed the order U/sec143(3) r.w…

Nageshwara Charitable Trust, Nagpur vs. CIT Exemption Pune, Pune

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

ITA 371/NAG/2023[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Mar 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.371/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Nageshwara Charitable The Commissioner Of Trust, V Income Tax, Exemption, 101, Laxmi Vilas Apartment, S Pune. Khare Town, Rangole Marg, Dharampeth, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440010. Pan: Aaatn2648F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C.Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 80G Of The Act, Dated 03.11.2022. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That Nageshwara Charitable Trust [A]

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 257Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…Covid-19 Pandemic. 7. In this background we have to interpret the relevant provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister. 7.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P Varghese Vs. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation: Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting the statutory provision but the s…

ACIT, Circle CC 15, New Delhi vs. Alka Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…aying that to invoke the provisions of section 69B of the Act, the burden is on the Revenue to prove that the real investment exceeds the investments shown in the books of accounts of the appellant. As observed by the Apex Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597. to throw the burden of showing that there is no understatement of the consideration received, on the appellant would be to cast an almost impossible burden upon him to establish in negative, namely, that he did not receive any consideration more than what has been declared by him. Therefore, if the Revenue seeks to hold that the appellant has re…

ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Yash Pal Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…aying that to invoke the provisions of section 69B of the Act, the burden is on the Revenue to prove that the real investment exceeds the investments shown in the books of accounts of the appellant. As observed by the Apex Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597. to throw the burden of showing that there is no understatement of the consideration received, on the appellant would be to cast an almost impossible burden upon him to establish in negative, namely, that he did not receive any consideration more than what has been declared by him. Therefore, if the Revenue seeks to hold that the appellant has re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Chennai vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 953/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on the Revenue.” Similar was the view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese (131 ITR 597 (SC)). The Apex Court held as follows, at page 612 of the Report: “The two circulars of the CBDT to which we have just referred are legally binding on the revenue and this binding character attaches to the two circulars even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 945/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on the Revenue.” Similar was the view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese (131 ITR 597 (SC)). The Apex Court held as follows, at page 612 of the Report: “The two circulars of the CBDT to which we have just referred are legally binding on the revenue and this binding character attaches to the two circulars even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 944/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on the Revenue.” Similar was the view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese (131 ITR 597 (SC)). The Apex Court held as follows, at page 612 of the Report: “The two circulars of the CBDT to which we have just referred are legally binding on the revenue and this binding character attaches to the two circulars even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 943/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on the Revenue.” Similar was the view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese (131 ITR 597 (SC)). The Apex Court held as follows, at page 612 of the Report: “The two circulars of the CBDT to which we have just referred are legally binding on the revenue and this binding character attaches to the two circulars even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 942/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.942, 943, 944, 945 & 953/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram Chits Private Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), 3-6-478, Iii Floor, Anand Estates, Chennai -600 034. Opp. Indian Bank, Liberty Road, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 500 029. [Pan:Aafcs44916D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Four Appeals In Ita Nos. 942 To 945/Chny/2023 Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 28.06.2023 Relevant The Assessment Years 2015-16, 20-17-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Common Grounds Raised In The Appeals Of The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of I.T. (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14A

…which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on the Revenue.” Similar was the view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese (131 ITR 597 (SC)). The Apex Court held as follows, at page 612 of the Report: “The two circulars of the CBDT to which we have just referred are legally binding on the revenue and this binding character attaches to the two circulars even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such…

Saravanan Priya, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw 15(4), Chennai

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

ITA 1245/CHNY/2023[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, Addl CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ए, "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A ’ (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1245/CHNY/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment year : 2016-2017. Smt. Saravanan Priya Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.2B, Non Corporate Ward 15(4) Saraswathi Symphony Chennai. Apartments ,Gandhi Nagar, 4th Main Road, Adyar, Chennai 600 020. [PAN ATLPP 6426F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri ARV Sreenivasan, Addl CIT सुनवाई क"…

Bhartiya International Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2110/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 156Section 195Section 40

…ary evidences including clause in the agreements entered into with overseas agents which places such obligations of quality check on the commission agents. It is well settled that onus lies on the person who alleges as observed in K.P. Verghese vs. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC). The Revenue cannot put an impossible burden on the assessee to prove a negative point. The AO has merely relied upon certain assertions purportedly made by the representative of the assessee towards quality check. No evidence has been placed to establish the factum of any such assertions. Be that as it may, such allegations cannot be impute…

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

…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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 770/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 Lovely Promoters Private ACIT, Limited Central Circle, Vs. 47A 47A, 3rd Floor Zakaria Ajmer. Street, Kolkata-700073. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCL1338C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.) jktLo…

Tiger 4 India Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 25(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 378/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

…IT 63 ITD 182 (Bom) ITA No. 377 & 378/Del/2023 8 Tiger 4 India Ltd. 4. In this connection, the appellant also places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. J.H. Gotla (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC), K. P. Varghese v. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) and CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) at page 195 to argue that the court may modify the language used by the legislature so as to achieve the intention of the legislature and to produce a rational result and furthermore that any case of ambiguity is required to be resolved in favour of the assessee.” 4. Heard the argume…

Tiger 4 India Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-25(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 377/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

…IT 63 ITD 182 (Bom) ITA No. 377 & 378/Del/2023 8 Tiger 4 India Ltd. 4. In this connection, the appellant also places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. J.H. Gotla (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC), K. P. Varghese v. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) and CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) at page 195 to argue that the court may modify the language used by the legislature so as to achieve the intention of the legislature and to produce a rational result and furthermore that any case of ambiguity is required to be resolved in favour of the assessee.” 4. Heard the argume…

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…assesse must be informed of the materials and must be given an adequate opportunity of explaining it. Suspicious cannot take place the evidence 1. DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil, (Mum) (Trib) (ITA No. 6727/M/2012 dt.20/8/2014 2. K.P. Varghese v. ITO, (1981) 131 ITR 579 (SC); 3. CIT v. Roman & Co., (1968) : 67 ITR 11 (SC); 4. CIT v. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.', (1973) 91 ITR 8 (SC); 5. Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT', (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Income assessed without evidence is bad-in-law. Income assessed by revenue without supporting material is not justified. 1. CIT V. BHUVANENDRA 303 ITR 235 (MAD.) 2. VINOD SOLA…

Jayanta Kumar Sardar, Bardhaman vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Durgapur.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1251/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…has been discharged, would it be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the DVO. Further, the opinion of the DVO, perse, is not an information and cannot be relied upon in the absence of other corroborative evidence (See K. P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC), Civil Appeal No. 9468 of 2003 (Asst. CIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC)) decided by the apex court on February 16, 2010, CIT v. Shakuntala Devi [2009] 316 ITR 46 (Delhi), CIT v. Ashok Khetrapal [2007] 294 ITR 143 (Delhi) and CIT v. Manoj Jain [2006] 287 ITR 285 (Delhi)." In the case of Asst. CIT vs. Dhariya Construction…

T B Lulla Charitable Foundation, Sangli vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 1220/PUN/2023[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1220/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :- T B Lulla Charitable The Cit Exemption, Foundation, V Pune. Atit Bungalow South Shivaji S Nagar, Behind Mali Chitr Mandir, Sangli - 416416. Pan: Aaect9113E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Shri Rakesh Jha – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/01/2024

Section 10Section 11Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…endment procedure. 7. In this background we have to interpret the relevant provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister. 7.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P Varghese Vs. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation: Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting the statutory provision but the s…

Shri Kailash Math Trust, Nashik vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1177/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1177/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Shri Kailash Math Trust, The Cit(Exemption), Bhaktidhan, Panchavati Peth V Pune. Road, Nashik – 422003. S Pan: Aabas0761Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Dr(Cit) Date Of Hearing 01/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 05/01/2024

Section 10Section 11Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…ash Math Trust [A] 7. In this background we have to interpret the relevant provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister. 7.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P Varghese Vs. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation: Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting the statutory provision but the s…

Bhartiya International Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2109/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 156

…ary evidences including clause in the agreements entered into with overseas agents which places such obligations of quality check on the commission agents. It is well settled that onus lies on the person who alleges as observed in K.P. Verghese vs. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC). The Revenue cannot put an impossible burden on the assessee to prove a negative point. The AO has merely relied upon certain assertions purportedly made by the representative of the assessee towards quality check. No evidence has been placed to establish the factum of any such assertions. Be that as it may, such allegations cannot be impute…