Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT

125 ITR 713Supreme Court of India1980#46 most cited

What is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT authority for?

Adverse material or evidence collected by the Assessing Officer behind the assessee's back, without providing it to the assessee or affording an opportunity for cross-examination, has no evidentiary value and cannot be relied upon to make additions.

962

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT · 125 ITR 713 · evidentiary value of adverse material · material collected behind assessee's back · opportunity of cross-examination · natural justice in assessment · income tax assessment evidence · section 143(3) · section 147 · reliance on statements without cross-examination

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 148Section 132(4)Section 69C

Issues it is cited on

section 158bbsection 292cretracted statementdumb documentssection 132(4a)on-moneyloose papersdocuments seizedlive linksection 34section 69bsection 292

Judgments citing Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT

YASH PAL,KAITHAL vs. ITO, WARD-2, KAITHAL

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 76/CHANDI/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.76/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Homelife Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – Central Circle - 1 बनाम/ Sunview Enclave, Ayali Kalan Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor, Ludhiana, Punjab – 142027 Opposite Bvm School Vs. Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabch-5690-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.191/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Dcit – Central Circle - 1 M/S Homelife Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor, Sunview Enclave, Ayali Kalan Opposite Bvm School Ludhiana, Punjab - 142027 Vs. Kitchlu Nagar Ludhiana "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabch-5690-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Sh. Manav Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-03-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 08-04-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5. Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 147Section 69BSection 69C

…the AO on the statement of these two persons without allowing any cross- examination to the assessee. The AR has submitted that such reliance is misplaced as per the binding judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chela Ram reported in 125 ITR 713 and Andaman Timber Industries reported in 281 TIR 214 and other judgments as perthe written submissions furnished by the assessee. It has been held in many cases that cross examination is not required in the case of each & every person if the facts are supported by the documents. The AO has mentioned that Sh. Ajay Kumar Prabhakar and Sh. Raj Kuma…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , LUDHIANA vs. HOMELIFE BUIDLCON PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 191/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.76/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Homelife Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – Central Circle - 1 बनाम/ Sunview Enclave, Ayali Kalan Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor, Ludhiana, Punjab – 142027 Opposite Bvm School Vs. Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabch-5690-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.191/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Dcit – Central Circle - 1 M/S Homelife Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor, Sunview Enclave, Ayali Kalan Opposite Bvm School Ludhiana, Punjab - 142027 Vs. Kitchlu Nagar Ludhiana "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabch-5690-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Sh. Manav Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-03-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 08-04-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5. Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 147Section 69BSection 69C

…the AO on the statement of these two persons without allowing any cross- examination to the assessee. The AR has submitted that such reliance is misplaced as per the binding judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chela Ram reported in 125 ITR 713 and Andaman Timber Industries reported in 281 TIR 214 and other judgments as perthe written submissions furnished by the assessee. It has been held in many cases that cross examination is not required in the case of each & every person if the facts are supported by the documents. The AO has mentioned that Sh. Ajay Kumar Prabhakar and Sh. Raj Kuma…

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…violation of the principles of natural justice. Such ex-parte material cannot, it is well settled, be relied on to draw any adverse inference against the appellant. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: - Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT: 125 ITR 713 (SC) - Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd v. CIT: 237 ITR I (SC) - State of Punjab v. Bhagat Ram: AIR 1974 SC 2335 - Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal: 167 ITR 498 (SC) - CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta: 207 CTR 115 (Del) - Sona Electric Company v. CIT: 152 ITR 507 (Del) - CIT v. Eastern Commercial: 210 ITR 103, 110 (Cal) - P.S. Abdul Majeed v.…

M/S. PEARL TRACOM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1201/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Pearl Tracom Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 3(1) C/O M/S Salarpuriajajodia& Co.7, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Chworinghee Square, Kolkata- Vs. Kolkata-700072, West Bengal 700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp9934G Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

…62 taxmann.com 3 (SC)/[2016] 38 GSTR 117 (SC)/[2015] 52 GST 355 (SC)/[2015] 314 ELT 641 (SC)[02-09- 2015]. The case of the assessee is also squarely covered by the decision of KishinchandChellaram vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1980] 4 Taxman 29 (SC)/[1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC)/[1980] 19 CTR 360 (SC)[16-09-1980]. Therefore, the addition made by the ld. AO and sustained by the ld. CIT (A) cannot be sustained. 4.3.4. The case of the assessee is also covered by the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of DCIT Vs. Pawanputra Advertising Private Limited, in IT(SS)A No. 144 & 145/KOL/2024, vide order dated 26.08.20…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5104/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5103/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5102/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5101/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT(OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5100/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5099/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SAMEER MUTREJA,GURGAON vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5098/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), DELHI

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

ITA 4957/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4956/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,HARYANA vs. JCIT (OSD), DELHI

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

ITA 4955/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4954/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4953/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,GURGOAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4952/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

SACHIN MUTREJA,HARYANA vs. JCIT(OSD), DELHI

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

ITA 4951/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 147Section 69A

…3 of the PBK), replies filed on 25.01.2024 (refer page 193-198 and 207 to 213 of the PBK), 27.02.2024 (refer page 288 to 293 of the PBK) and 15.03.2024 (refer page 294 to 298 of the PBK). 11.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [(1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)] has categorically held that any material used against an assessee must be disclosed and the assessee must be granted an opportunity to rebut the same. ITA Nos. 5098 to 5104/Del/2025 Sameer Mutreja ITA Nos. 4951 to 4957/Del/2025 Sachin Mutreja 11.4. In the present case, the entire addition is based on statements of third parties recorded du…

DCIT-3(1)(1),MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. EXPORT IMPORT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9462/MUM/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 9460/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 1999-00) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Ita No. 9457/Mum/2025 Ita No. 9461/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2000-01) (Assessment Year: 2005-06) Ita No. 9462/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2001-02) (Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3(1)(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 V/S Export Import Bank Of India, Centre One Building, Floor 21, World Trade Centre Complex, ……………… Respondent Cuffe Parade, Mumbai – 400005 Pan : Aaace2769D

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 2(22)Section 23(2)Section 237Section 250

…e of Smt. Mrudulaben B. Patel v. Asstt. CIT (2003) 85 ITD 463 (Ahd.) (SMC), the question was whether any part undisclosed income of a company received by director could be said to be income chargeable to tax. In the case of Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1962) 46 ITR 640 (SC), the question was whether payment made as dividend by a company to its shareholders would lose the character of dividend merely because it was paid out of capital. In all these, there existed share capital of company as well as shareholders. Thus, the facts of those cases were entirely different from the present case inasmuch as in the presen…

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. EXPORT IMPORT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9461/MUM/2025[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 9460/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 1999-00) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Ita No. 9457/Mum/2025 Ita No. 9461/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2000-01) (Assessment Year: 2005-06) Ita No. 9462/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2001-02) (Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3(1)(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 V/S Export Import Bank Of India, Centre One Building, Floor 21, World Trade Centre Complex, ……………… Respondent Cuffe Parade, Mumbai – 400005 Pan : Aaace2769D

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 2(22)Section 23(2)Section 237Section 250

…e of Smt. Mrudulaben B. Patel v. Asstt. CIT (2003) 85 ITD 463 (Ahd.) (SMC), the question was whether any part undisclosed income of a company received by director could be said to be income chargeable to tax. In the case of Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1962) 46 ITR 640 (SC), the question was whether payment made as dividend by a company to its shareholders would lose the character of dividend merely because it was paid out of capital. In all these, there existed share capital of company as well as shareholders. Thus, the facts of those cases were entirely different from the present case inasmuch as in the presen…

Showing 1–20 of 962 · Page 1 of 49

...