Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

37 ITR 288Supreme Court of India1959#110 most cited

What is Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT authority for?

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

570

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT · unexplained cash deposit · cash credit section 68 · unexplained money section 69A · rejection of books of account section 145(3) · acceptance of books · sufficiency of cash balance · assessment addition · cash book balance · mercantile system of accounting

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 147Section 132Section 143(2)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 132(4a)dumb documentsrejection of books of accountsection 69bsection 292csection 145(3)section 34loose paperson-moneysection 10(38)penny stockaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT-Cir-8, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3494/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S Procter & Gamble Cit-8, Hygiene & Health Care, Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ P & G Plaza, Cardinal M.K. Road, Vs. Gracias Road, Chakala, Mumbai-400020 Andheri(E), Mumbai-400099 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacp6332M

Section 263Section 80I

…& Har.) (para 12), xxv. CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports (P.) Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 166/[2011] 202 Taxman 130/11 taxmann.com 54 (Delhi) (para 13), xxvi. Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC) (para 14), xxvii. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) (para 14), xxviii. Reliance Jute & Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 921/2 Taxman 417 (SC) (para 15), xxix. Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1966] 60 ITR 262 (SC) (para 15), xxx. CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2011] 332 ITR 167/[2010] 189 Taxman 436 (Delhi) (para 16), xxxi. Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. ITO [1978] 115 ITR 799 (Cal.) (…

Sanjay Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6097/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. L. M. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6097/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sanjay Singh, Vs DCIT, L.M. Agarwal & Co., CA, Circle-2, KA-32, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad-201001 Ghaziabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AONPS6917B Assessee by : Sh. L. M. Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 05.05.2017 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01.09.2016 of ld. CIT (A), Ghaziabad. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. That the learned C…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pacl India Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes, whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3779/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153A

…g Officer that the expenditure is not genuine and no other material or evidence is gathered or found during the search to show that the claim of the expenditure is not genuine. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat reported in 37 ITR 288 that the suspicion however great cannot take the place of evidence. It is a matter of record that two searches were conducted at the premises of the appellant on 22.09.2005 and 25.08.2006 and no incriminating documents, books of accounts etc. were found or seized to indicate that the appellant had claimed any bogus expenditure to reduce the burden…

Pacl India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes, whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2894/DEL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153A

…g Officer that the expenditure is not genuine and no other material or evidence is gathered or found during the search to show that the claim of the expenditure is not genuine. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat reported in 37 ITR 288 that the suspicion however great cannot take the place of evidence. It is a matter of record that two searches were conducted at the premises of the appellant on 22.09.2005 and 25.08.2006 and no incriminating documents, books of accounts etc. were found or seized to indicate that the appellant had claimed any bogus expenditure to reduce the burden…

Sri.Syed Aleemullah, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 389/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Syed Aleemullah, Prop. S.A.Developers, No.950, 27Th A Main, Jayanagar, 9Th Block, Bengaluru-560069. … Appellant Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle- 4(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri P.Dinesh, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit(Dr). Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2017

For Appellant: Shri P.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

…ovisions of clause (f) of sub-section (10) of section 80-IB were very applicable and there is a clear violation of the said clause. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance & Jute Ind. Ltd. vs. CIT(120 ITR 921)(SC). Learned DR further submitted that confirmation letter filed by the buyers of the flats are stereotyped and cannot be believed in the absence of bringing on record any corroborative evidence such as proof of payment by owners to the contractor, story of the assessee that the flats Page 11 of 19 were subsequently converted into duplex house b…

DCIT 13(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Nihar Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3790/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 234B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘’I’’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA ( ACCOUNT MEMBER) I.T.A.Nos. 3020 to 3024/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd V/s DCIT, 13(1)(1) [Erstwhile DCIT-9(2)] 117, CD Government Industrial Mumbai Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kandivli (W), Mumbai- 67 PAN : AABCN9153N Appellant Respondent I.T.A.Nos. 3790 to 3794/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) DCIT, 13(1)(1), Mumbai V/s Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd 117, CD Government Industrial Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kan…

Nihaar Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 13(1)(1)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3020/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 234B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘’I’’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA ( ACCOUNT MEMBER) I.T.A.Nos. 3020 to 3024/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd V/s DCIT, 13(1)(1) [Erstwhile DCIT-9(2)] 117, CD Government Industrial Mumbai Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kandivli (W), Mumbai- 67 PAN : AABCN9153N Appellant Respondent I.T.A.Nos. 3790 to 3794/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) DCIT, 13(1)(1), Mumbai V/s Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd 117, CD Government Industrial Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kan…

ACIT, Cir-52, Kolkata vs. M/S Balaji Export Corporation, Kolkata

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue, is dismissed

ITA 591/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Venkatramani, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…flating and manipulating the consumption figures. In Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC), Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC)Umarcharan Shaw & Bros. v CIT(1959) 37 ITR 271(SC) and LalchandBhagatAmbica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), it had clearly been held by the Apex Court that there must be something more than mere suspicion in support of an assessment and mere suspicion cannot take the place of proof for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. Hence, the addition of Rs.3,27,04,943/- on account of bogus hawala purchases is deleted.” 4. Aggrieved from the ord…

Sunil Tarafdar, Malda vs. I.T.O WD - 3, Malda

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed as stated above

ITA 363/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(2)

…rs and submitted the photo copies of the electricity bills. The Assessee was contended the additions made by the AO were on suspicion and surmises, which has no basis and relied on the decisions in Lalchand ITA No. 363/Kol/13 Sunil Tarafdar 3 Baghat vs. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT vs Ashim Kr. Mondal 270 ITR 160 (Cal) etc. 9. The CIT-A deleted the addition regarding suppressed purchase and confirmed the crushing charges of R.5,24,620/- and the relevant portion of which is reproduced herein below: “I have carefully considered the submission of the Ld AR and also perused the assessment order. Apparently, the Ld AO…

M/S Divakar Solar System Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)

…d was placed on the following decisions :- (a) Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd vs CIT reported in 26 ITR 775 (SC) (b) Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs CIT reported in 37 ITR 288 (SC) 4.5. In response to this, the ld DR argued that the work that is expected of Mrs Chandana Poddar is purely technical in nature which could not be rendered without possessing the requisite technical qualifications. Hence, in the absence of filing details of educational qualification of Mrs Chandana Poddar , the payments made to her would not…

ITO, Rohtak vs. M/S. Veekay Medicos, Rohtak

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 968/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh.G.D.Agarwal & Smt Diva Singh

Section 194HSection 40

…liance for this proposition is placed on 37 ITR 271(SC) Uma Charan Shaw &Bros. Co. v.CIT and other decision 37 ITR 151(SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait v CIT 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT, Bombay, 26 ITR 775 (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills ltd. V CIT, 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT, 91 ITR 8 (SC) CIT v Calcutta Discount Company Ltd." Further, this issue is covered by the this office order for A.Y. 2008-09. In view of the above, the addition is deleted and this ground of appeal is allowed. Regarding the disallowance made by the AO also on the ground of non deduction of TDS u/s 194H and d…

Dun & Bradstreet Information Services India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 8, Mumbai

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

ITA 3989/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dun & Bradstreet Information Vs. The Commissioner Of Services India Pvt. Ltd., Icc Income Tax, Chambers, 98, Saki Vihar Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Powai, Mumbai 400 072 M. K. Road, Mumbai Pan: Aaacd P Appellant .. Respondent

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 263Section 436Section 50B

…law applicable and to be applied shall be the law as on the 1st day of April of the relevant assessment year. This is a universally accepted proposition, which was upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Jute and Industries Limited vs .CIT [(1979) 120 ITR 921]. Thus, applying the ratio of the above decision, the rate of depreciation is to be applied on the WDV of the block of assets existing as on the 1st day of the relevant assessment year i.e., as on 1 April 2007 in the 7 present case, however, since the assets have been transferred by way of slump sale on 14.02.2007 and are not owned by the assesse…

Richiline Leasing and Fianance P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5405/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 27(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)

…a in the case of Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Orissa vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd on 19 March, 1986 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied on its decision in the case of Messrs. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar and Orissa [37 ITR 288]. Relevant extract the said judgement relied upon by the Supreme Court is reproduced as under: "This Court was concerned there with the encashment of high denomination notes. In that case some unexplained high denomination notes were treated as the undisclosed income of the appellant. This Court held that when a court of fact arrives at its decisi…

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 5722/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…ial, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT The Tribunal in arriving at the conclusion it did in the present case indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a view of the facts which could not reasonably be entertained or the facts found were such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as t…

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 996/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…ial, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT The Tribunal in arriving at the conclusion it did in the present case indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a view of the facts which could not reasonably be entertained or the facts found were such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as t…

M/S. Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is party allowed

ITA 5696/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiiveco Spa, Adit, Copia Corporate Suite, Circle-1(2), Plot No.9, Jasola District Vs. International Taxation, Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent) Iveco Spa, Adit, (Now Fiat Gestione Partecipazioni Circle-1(2), Spa), Vs. International Taxation, 301-304, Plot No.9, Copia Corporate New Delhi Suites, Jasola, Dist Center, New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 271(1)

…No. CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxmann 482 1. (Del) i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswai Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 2. ii) 37 ITR 151 (SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait Vs. CIT iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs. CIT, Bombay iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT v) AIR 1977 SC 796 Krishnand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh vi) Air 1974 SC 171 Jayadayal Poddar Vs. mst Bibi hazra vii) 242 ITR 133 (ker CIT Vs. K. Mahim Udma Deputy Director of Income Tax Vs. M/s. JC Bamford Excavators 3. Ltd. (ITA No. 540/Del/2011 dated 14.03.2014 Worley Pearson Services Pty Ltd., reported…

Iveco Spa, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is party allowed

ITA 5447/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiiveco Spa, Adit, Copia Corporate Suite, Circle-1(2), Plot No.9, Jasola District Vs. International Taxation, Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent) Iveco Spa, Adit, (Now Fiat Gestione Partecipazioni Circle-1(2), Spa), Vs. International Taxation, 301-304, Plot No.9, Copia Corporate New Delhi Suites, Jasola, Dist Center, New Delhi Pan:Aabci2759L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 271(1)

…No. CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxmann 482 1. (Del) i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswai Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 2. ii) 37 ITR 151 (SC) Omar Salay Mohammad Sait Vs. CIT iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs. CIT, Bombay iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT v) AIR 1977 SC 796 Krishnand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh vi) Air 1974 SC 171 Jayadayal Poddar Vs. mst Bibi hazra vii) 242 ITR 133 (ker CIT Vs. K. Mahim Udma Deputy Director of Income Tax Vs. M/s. JC Bamford Excavators 3. Ltd. (ITA No. 540/Del/2011 dated 14.03.2014 Worley Pearson Services Pty Ltd., reported…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Shri S.K. Sethi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is jettisoned

ITA 1440/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri L.N. Malik, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Bernwal Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…surmises and conjectures as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases. a) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT 26 ITR 736 b) Omar Salay Mohammed Sait v CIT 37 ITR 151 c) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT 26 ITR 775 d) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT 37 ITR 288 15.7 In the case of Acchyalal Shaw v. ITO (2009) 30 SOT 44 (Kol.) (URO), the Hon’ble ITAT observed as under: “Suspicion cannot replace evidential document. Simple argument or allegation of manipulation is not sufficient without proper evidence.” 15.8 I am in full agreement with the contentions of the AR. In the light of the various decisions ci…

M/S Continental Carriers vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/415/2004HC Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 260ASection 80

…Page 11 of 19 Assessee could not be changed unless the AO finds the same to distort profits. 17. Lastly, Mr Kaushik referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT: 37 ITR 288 (SC) and of the Madras High Court in CIT, Chennai v. M/s Matrix Intel Pvt. Ltd. Chennai: 2006-TIOL-389-HC-MAD-IT and contended that it was incumbent upon the ITAT to consider all the facts, both for and against the Assessee, before rejecting the contentions or material submitted by the Assessee. He also relied on the decision of this Court i…

M/S Continental Carrier vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/264/2002HC Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 260ASection 80

…Page 11 of 19 Assessee could not be changed unless the AO finds the same to distort profits. 17. Lastly, Mr Kaushik referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT: 37 ITR 288 (SC) and of the Madras High Court in CIT, Chennai v. M/s Matrix Intel Pvt. Ltd. Chennai: 2006-TIOL-389-HC-MAD-IT and contended that it was incumbent upon the ITAT to consider all the facts, both for and against the Assessee, before rejecting the contentions or material submitted by the Assessee. He also relied on the decision of this Court i…