How many judgments cite Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal?

23 judgments on BharatTax cite Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal (167 ITR 498), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 115BBE, Section 133A, Section 292C, Section 68.

Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal

167 ITR 498Supreme Court of India1987#5103 most cited

What is Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal authority for?

A taxpayer must be supplied with all oral and documentary evidence used against them to prepare their defence, including the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, as the failure to do so vitiates proceedings.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal · cross-examination · natural justice · evidence · oral evidence · documentary evidence · right to defence · opportunity to be heard · SC 1987

Also reported as

66 STC 292

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 115BBE Section 133A Section 292C Section 68 Section 69C Section 131

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statement retracted statement colourable device disallowance of interest expenditure on-money addition under section 68 block period section 292c loose papers advance tax section 127 unexplained expenditure

Judgments citing Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2, (1), Bilaspur(Cg) vs. Shri Praveen Saluja, Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 92/BIL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

Section 106Section 131Section 69ASection 69C

…In Mukand Singh & Sons v. Presiding Officer 107 STC page 300 (P&H) it was held that the AO had acted illegally in refusing the request of the appellant for summoning the concerned party for cross examination. In Kalra Glue Factory v Sales Tax Tribunal (1987) 66 STC 292 the SC had reversed the order of Sales Tax Tribunal solely on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. According to the SC statement of the party hostile to the appellant was not allowed to be tested by cross examination and hence the same having no evidentiary value could not be used against the appellant. The MP HC in Prakash Ch…

Kamakshi Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 481/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT - DR &

Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…India (Firm), Lucknow v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central- I & Ano. ([2008] 14 SCC 151] (SC) State of Kerala s. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff [1977] 39 STC 478 (SC) Kishan Chand Chela Ram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal [1987] 167 ITR 498 (SC) CTO v. Haryana Dal Mill [1993] 90 STC 519 (SC) 5 Right of Cross Examination – Fundamental Right of Assessee 23-25 P.S. Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income tax & Sales Tax Officer [1994] 209 ITR 821 (Ker - HC) CIT v. Eastern Commercial Enterprises[1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal - HC) Mahaveer Transport Co. v. ITO reported at [1987] Vol. 23 ITD 206 (H…

Dilipkumar Phoolchand Jain, Thane vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Thane

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5954/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey() & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Dilip Kumar Phoolchand Jain Vs. Acit Cen Cir-2 Prop M.S. Globe Enterprises, 102/108 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park Jagannath Chawl, Phanswadi R.No. 16Z, Wagle Indl Estate, Bhiwandi, Dist: Thane Thane(W)- 400604 Thane - 421302 Pan No. Aarpj1996K

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh Ratna ParkhiFor Respondent: Shri. B.S. Bisht

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…before ld. CIT(A) has been mentioned. Therein, the assessee has relied on some decisions. The copies of the said decisions were not filed before us. Inspite of it, we shall try to examine them. The first decision is M/s Karla Glue Factory vs. STT & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 498 (SC) . The assessee submits that where the statement of a person is recorded behind the back of the assessee but not tested by cross examination, such a statement cannot be allowed to be used to the prejudice of the assessee. The second decision relied on by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) is Mukesh R. Marolia vs. Addl. CIT, 6 SOT 247(Mum.)(2…