What is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT authority for?

An assessee is entitled to be confronted with evidence used against them and to an opportunity for cross-examination, especially when that evidence is from a third party or a retracted statement. Failure to provide such an opportunity violates the principles of natural justice.

How many judgments cite Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT?

962 judgments on BharatTax cite Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 132, Section 153A, Section 153C, Section 148.

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713)

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…hat if the testimony of these two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…hat if the testimony of these two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…hat if the testimony of these two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the Show-Cause Notice.” iii) 125 ITR 713 (SC) Kishnichand Chellaram vs. CIT iv) 288 ITR 345 (Del.) CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Limited v) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT vs. S.M. Aggarwal vi) 295 ITR 105 (Del) CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. vii) 303 ITR 95 (Del) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta viii) 322 ITR 396 (Del) CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta ix) 379 ITR 367 (Del) CIT v Sunil Aggarwal x) 382 ITR 639 (Del…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 64/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 57/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 56/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 54/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 53/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

D S R Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 51/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 50/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

D S R Infrastructureprivate Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle- 1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 49/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found in the premises of DSR. In such cases the assessment order is void as laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT 119841 152 ITR 507 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. Commissioner /1963] 49 ITR 561 [All], VasanjiGhela& Co. v. CST 119771 40 STC 549 (Born) and E.M.0 (Works) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1963] 49 ITR 650 (All), Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE [2015] 62 tcycmann.com 3 (SC). 1. The assessment order has been pasSed on mere surmi…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO Circle-6(2)(1) Mumabi, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2542/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…d. AO as well as the ld. CIT(A). The assessment order is passed without confronting with the material relied on by the ld. AO including the statement of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Others. The ld. AR respectfully relied on KishinchandChellaram v/s CIT – (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)& CIT v/s Ashish International – ITXA 4299 of 2009 (Bombay High Court. 6.4. The ld. AR further submits thatin the present case the Ld. AOas well as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that u/s 68 of the Act an assessee is required to prove the nature and source of credit, which was duly proved, and which has in fact been accept…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2538/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…d. AO as well as the ld. CIT(A). The assessment order is passed without confronting with the material relied on by the ld. AO including the statement of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Others. The ld. AR respectfully relied on KishinchandChellaram v/s CIT – (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)& CIT v/s Ashish International – ITXA 4299 of 2009 (Bombay High Court. 6.4. The ld. AR further submits thatin the present case the Ld. AOas well as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that u/s 68 of the Act an assessee is required to prove the nature and source of credit, which was duly proved, and which has in fact been accept…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle -6(1)(1)-Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

ITA 2537/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…Id. AO as well as the Id. CIT(A). The assessment order is passed without confronting with the material relied on by the Id. AO including the statement of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Others. The Id. AR respectfully relied on KishinchandChellaram v/s CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)& CIT v/s Ashish International – ITXA 4299 of 2009 (Bombay High Court. 6.4. The Id. AR further submits thatin the present case the Ld. AOas well as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that u/s 68 of the Act an assessee is required to prove the nature and source of credit, which was duly proved, and which has in fact been accepte…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2536/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…d. AO as well as the ld. CIT(A). The assessment order is passed without confronting with the material relied on by the ld. AO including the statement of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Others. The ld. AR respectfully relied on KishinchandChellaram v/s CIT – (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)& CIT v/s Ashish International – ITXA 4299 of 2009 (Bombay High Court. 6.4. The ld. AR further submits thatin the present case the Ld. AOas well as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that u/s 68 of the Act an assessee is required to prove the nature and source of credit, which was duly proved, and which has in fact been accept…

Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat, Jaysinghpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Ichalkaranji Circle, Ichalkaranji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 541/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Vs Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Commissioner Of Income 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co- Tax, Op Hsg Society, Kolhapur. Jaysinghpur – 416101. Maharashtra Pan: Adlpg5040N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee

Section 234BSection 250Section 69

…had requested for cross- examination of Mr.Vivek Dhamanse, but both AO as well as ld.CIT(A) has denied the opportunity. Ld.AR submitted that it is against the principle of natural justice. Ld.AR relied on following decisions :  Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE 62 taxmann.com 3/127 DTR 241 by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  Vetrivel Minerals Vs. ACIT 129 taxmann.com 126 by Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 3. Ld.AR humbly submitted that the case may kindly be remanded back to the Assessing Officer with a direction to provide opportunity of Cross-examina…

Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat, Jaysinghpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Ichalkaranji Circle, Ichalkaranji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 540/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Vs Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Commissioner Of Income 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co- Tax, Op Hsg Society, Kolhapur. Jaysinghpur – 416101. Maharashtra Pan: Adlpg5040N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee

Section 234BSection 250Section 69

…had requested for cross- examination of Mr.Vivek Dhamanse, but both AO as well as ld.CIT(A) has denied the opportunity. Ld.AR submitted that it is against the principle of natural justice. Ld.AR relied on following decisions :  Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE 62 taxmann.com 3/127 DTR 241 by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  Vetrivel Minerals Vs. ACIT 129 taxmann.com 126 by Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 3. Ld.AR humbly submitted that the case may kindly be remanded back to the Assessing Officer with a direction to provide opportunity of Cross-examina…

Aragounder Muthusamy, Erode vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Erode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/CHNY/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.231/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 V. Shri Aragounder Muthusamy, The Ito, 24A, Thiruvalluvar Street, Ward-2(2), Bhavani Main Road, Erode. Perundurai Taluk, Erode District-638 052. [Pan: Adqpm 7930 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 144ASection 148

…omission on the part of the AO/ACIT violates the natural justice, and therefore, we do not countenance such an action of the AO and for that we rely on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT reported in [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Andaman Timber Industries [2015] 281 CTR 214 (SC), wherein, their Lordships are held omission to cross-examination of Shri Aragounder Muthusamy :: 6 :: third party statement would make the statement null in the eyes of law. It would be gainful to refer to the order of D…

Nirav Chandrakantbhai Bhalani, Bhavnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1041/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1041/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year :2016-17 Nirav Chandrakantbhai The Pr.Cit,Ahmedabad-1 Bhalani बनाम/ Ahmedabad-380 015 Plot No.9, Vibhapark Society V/S. Adhewada, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar – 364 002 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bcipb 8197 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 27/03/2024 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-1 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Pcit” In Short] In Exercise Of His Revisionary Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” In Short) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Nirav Chandrakantbhai Bhalani Vs. The Pcit Asst. Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…his returned income. The assessee further stated that any addition made without giving any evidence is bad in law and also against natural justice and placing reliance on following judicial pronouncements: 1. In the case of Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC), where it was held that before the income tax authorities could rely upon a piece of evidence, they were bound to produce it before the assessee so that the assessee could controvert the statement contained in it by asking for an opportunity for cross examination of the person with reference to the statement made by him. 2. The Hon’ble Gujar…

John Distilleries Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ence collected by the department from employees cannot be considered as a reliable unless it is substantiated. 20.22 Reliance on this incomplete statement cannot be appreciated as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT, 125 ITR 713 (SC) as follows:- “Held, reversing the decision of the High Court, (i) on the facts, that the two letters dated February 18, 1955 , and March 9, 1957 did not constitute any material evidence which the Tribunal could take into account for the purpose of arriving at the finding that the sum of ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels…

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT

What is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Pioneer Builders, Hyderabad

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

D S R Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Dsr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

D S R Infrastructureprivate Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle- 1(4), Hyderabad

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO Circle-6(2)(1) Mumabi, Aaykar Bhavan

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle -6(1)(1)-Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat, Jaysinghpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Ichalkaranji Circle, Ichalkaranji

Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat, Jaysinghpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Ichalkaranji Circle, Ichalkaranji

Aragounder Muthusamy, Erode vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Erode

Nirav Chandrakantbhai Bhalani, Bhavnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

John Distilleries Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore