How many judgments cite Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT?

17 judgments on BharatTax cite Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT (79 ITR 540), spanning 2016 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144B, Section 147, Section 148, Section 151A, Section 68.

Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT

79 ITR 540High Court1971#6717 most cited

What is Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer (AO) must assist the assessee by exercising powers, such as issuing summons to creditors, to enable the production of evidence. Failure to do so may vitiate the entire assessment order, especially concerning unexplained cash credits.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT · section 131 · summons · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · unexplained cash credit · section 68 · vitiate assessment · AO assist assessee · production of evidence

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 151A Section 68

Issues it is cited on

summons under section 131 source of source creditworthiness of the creditor share application money genuineness of the transaction section 131 undisclosed income unexplained cash credit reassessment proceedings section 68 section 15 section 143(1)

Judgments citing Munna Lal Murlidhar v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jaipur vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 656/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani (FCA)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148A

…al justice are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of material which is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it - 23. M/s Munnalal murlidhar Vs CIT 79 ITR 540 (All) Assessment – Production of Books etc. – Under section 23(2) of 1922 Act assessing officer is bound to give reasonable time and opportunity to produce evidence- Failure on the part of the officer to do so would vitiate entire proceedings of assessment In view of the aforesaid submissions the Hon’ble ITAT is requested to quashed the assessmen…

ITO, Ward, Phalodi vs. M/S Rama Allure LLP, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/JODH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: The Date, The Appeal Is Finally Heard.”

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…reditor for producing the bank statement and no effort is also made to call for the information from the concerned Bank of the creditor, despite the request made by the assessee. The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of MunnalalMuralidhar v. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 540 held that "A.O. should assist the assessee by exercising power to enable the assessee to produce the evidences. Otherwise, the entire assessment order would vitiate". Since the A.O. did not take any steps in the matter, therefore, no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee in respect of the creditor Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. It may a…

M/S. Punjab Iron & Steel Company Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 75/ASR/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT DR

Section 153ASection 68

…acts from the record nor conveyed about the same to the assessee and made the addition. Even during remand report in-spite of request of the assessee, AO failed to summon the depositor. Hence addition on this account is unjustified. Munnalal Murlidhar vs. CIT 79 ITR 540 (Allahabad).: "5. It does not appear from the record that the ITO had considered the petition of the assessee and passed an order thereon. As Lord Shaw had said, "of things that do not appear and of things that do not exist, the reckoning in law is the same.” It may be presumed, therefore, that no order was passed by the ITO on the application of…

DCIT, Circle-4, Jaipur vs. M/S Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…9 (SC) (c) Abdul Razak Vs. CIT (1935) 3 ITR 361 (Pat) (d) Balasubramanian (P.N.) Vs. ITO (1978) 112 ITR 512 (AP) (e) Bagsu Devi Bafna Vs. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 506 (Cal) (f) Cashmir Vastralaya Vs. CIT (1978) 112 ITR 630 (Pat) (v) Munna Lal Murlidhar Vs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All) The principle of natural justice involve a right in the assessee to inspect the reports and obtain the substance of the all relevant documents such as statements, orders, reports etc. so as to be able to lead evidence in rebuttal or to cross examine witness who have given evidence against him. It also means that the assessee should be given…

DCIT-13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Vedartha Entertainment Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4169/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-13(3)(2), M/S Vedartha Entertainment Ltd., Room No. 229/219, 2Nd Floor, Vs. 201, 2Nd Floor, Jaimala Apartment, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Near Hotel Shimmers, Link Road, Mumbai-400020. Malad (E), Mumbai-400064. Pan No. Aaecv 0129 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Usha Gaikwad, Dr Assessee By : Ms. Neelkant Khandelwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 21/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/11/2021

For Appellant: Ms. Neelkant Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Usha Gaikwad, DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)

…l the witness and examine him, he cannot treat the deposit in the name of the witness as assessee's suppressed income (Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT, (1963) 49 ITR 561 (AIl); E.M.C. Works Pr. Ltd. v. ITO, (1963) 49 ITR 650 (All); MunnalalMurlidhar v. CIT, (1971) 79 ITR 540 (Al); R.S. Seth Gopikisan Agarwal v. A.C. of S.T., (1971) Tax LR 355 (MP). Also see, Ashok Electro Diamonds v. Jt. CTO, (1971) 28 TC 21 (Mad); Mahboob Singh Subhash Chand Arhanti v. CST, (1988) 69 STC 229, 230 (All); CIT v. Ter Karadhenu Vyapar Co. Ltd., (2003) 263 ITR 692, 696(cal)]. In a proper case, the learned AO should exercise all his power…

M/S Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 2106/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…summons and examine the creditors, he cannot, subsequently, treat the loans standing in the name of such creditors as non-genuine; nor add the amount thereof to the assessee’s income.” 10.1. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Mannalal Muralidhar 79 ITR 540 held that “A.O. should 35 ITA.No.2106/Del./2013 Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd., [Formerly known as M/s. Shalom Exim (P) Ltd., and then as Mamram Developers P. Ltd.,] Delhi. assist the assessee by exercising the power to enable the assessee to produce evidences, otherwise, assessment would vitiate.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee ha…

Garima Polymers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-16, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 1302/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131(1)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 153

…itor for producing the bank statement and no effort is also made to call for the information from the concerned Bank of the creditor, despite the request made by the assessee. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Munnalal Muralidhar vs., CIT [1971] 79 ITR 540 (Alld.) held that “A.O. should assist the assessee by exercising power to enable the assessee to produce the evidences. Otherwise, the entire assessment order would vitiate”. Since the A.O. did not take any steps in the matter, therefore, no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee in respect of the creditor Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd.…

DCIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. Shri Jugal Kishore Garg(Derewala), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 34/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi, CIT- DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)

…ce are applicable to assessment proceedings. The elementary principle of natural justice is that the assessee should have knowledge of the material which is going to be used against him so that he may be able to meet it. (i) Munna Lal Murlidhar Vs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All) The principle of natural justice involve a right in the assessee to inspect the reports and obtain the substance of the all relevant documents such as statements, orders, reports etc. so as to be able to lead evidence in rebuttal or to cross examine witness who have given evidence against him. It also means that the assessee should be given…

Smt. Saroj Bansal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1226/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

…to issue notice u/s 131 and application was rejected by the AO summarily and assessment completed, action of the AO was held to be without jurisdiction. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Munnalal Murlidhar 79 ITR 540 wherein it was held that the failure on the part of the AO to call for and examine the evidence which is offered by the assessee materially prejudices the assessee and it is denial to the assessee of opportunity to produce evidence in support of its case. 12. As per our considered view when the assessee has duly filed confirmations from all the b…

Smt. Chitra Bansal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

Navyug Iron Traders, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 553/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh KumarFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D.R

Section 68

…s inability and request AO to conduct enquiry but fails to do so, Onus on assessee discharged. He cant make addition for non-production etc. OM Prakash Singh V ACIT—ITA NO.331/agra/2016 - order dt.22.03.2019 (Agra Bench) 21-27 MUNNA LAL MURIDHAR VS CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (ALL) NathuRam Premchand (1963) 49 ITR 561(ALL) D. NO addition u/s 68 for non-production of depositors/Confirmation/non-service of summons etc.. 7 ITA.No.553/Del./2017 M/s. Navyug Iron Traders, Ghaziabad. Where confirmation/Bank details etc. filed H.R. Mehta V ACIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 110 (Bombay H.C.) Himachal Fibers Ltd. [2018] 98 taxmann.co…

Shri Om Prakash Singh, Mathura vs. ACIT Circle-3, Agra

In the result appeal is partly allowed

ITA 331/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 144Section 234BSection 44ASection 68

…Chand Chelaram vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (S.C.) (i) CIT Vs. RanchhodJivabhaiNakhava in Appeal No. 50 of 2011 (Guj. H.C) (j) CIT Vs. M/s. Dataware (P) Limited in ITAT No. 263 of 2011 GA No. 2856 of 2011 (Calcutta High Court) (k) MunnalalMurliDharVs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All.) 11 I.T.A No. 331/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) (l) CIT VsKamdhenuVyapar Co. Limited (2003) 263ITR 692 (Cal) (m) Addl CIT VsRadheyShyamJagdish Prasad(1979) 117 ITR 186 (Allahabad) 16. Per contra, the Ld. CIT, D.R has placedstrong reliance up on the impugned order, submitted that the party from whom advance is claimed to have been rec…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sutlej Agro Products Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 289/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 132(2)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68

…/s. 131 issued could not be served, whereas in the instant cases, no summons u/s. 131(1) were issued despite request of the assessee and furnishing current addresses of the share holders. Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Munnalal Murlidhar vs. CIT, 79 ITR 540 (All.), held that the AO should assist the assessee by exercising powers to enable the assessee to produce evidence. In absence of same, the assessment would vitiate. Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ramesh Chand Shukla (MAIT No. 71 of 2003 decided on 01.04.2005 held, “it is now well settled that where the assessee requests the Asses…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3833/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…in law. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Niranjanlal Ramballabh Vs CIT (1956) 29 ITR 459 (Nag) " Nathu Ram Premchand Vs CIT (1963) 49 ITR 561 (All) " E M C (Works) (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (1963) 49 ITR 650 (All) " Munnalal Murlidhar Vs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All) " Surmukh Singh Uppal (Dr) Vs CIT (1983) 144 ITR 200 (P&H) " N C K Sons Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (2007) 289 ITR (AT) 89 (Mum) 10. It was further submitted that where the assessee furnished the evidences to prove the identity of the creditors and furnished confirmation letter indicating their PAN/GIR numbers. The onus cast upon the assessee w…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3832/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

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

…(All.) " Ali Huesin Vs STO (1988) 68 STC 319 (Ori) " Ashok Electro Diamonds Vs Jt. CTO (1971) 28 STC 21 (Mad.) " EMC Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (1963) 49 ITR 650 (All.) " Mahboob Singh Subhash Chand Arhati Vs CST (1988) STC 229 " Munnalal Murlidhar Vs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All.) " KS Seth Gopikisan Agarwal Vs AC of ST (1971) Tax LR 355 (MP) " Pravin Colour Co. Vs ITO (1977) Taxation 48(6)- 155 (Bom-Trib.) " Nathu Ram Prem Chnad Vs CIT (1963) 49 ITR 561 (All) " CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Add. CIT Vs Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 (Pat) 14. The ld. CIT(A) also asked the remand rep…

ITO, Uttar Pradesh vs. Shri Shah Javed Saddat, Saharanpur

In the result, cross objections of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 884/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri C.M.Garg, Jm & Sri O.P. Kant, Am Ita No. 884/Del./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ng his reply therefore it is a clear violation of principles of natural justice by the AO. For this proposition the Ld. AR to support has placed reliance on the following decisions of Hon’ble High Court and Tribunal (i) Munna Lal Murlidhar vs. CIT reported as 79 ITR 540 (All.) (ii) M. Mohd. Ishaq vs. CIT reported as 27 ITR 510 (Punjab). 7. On replying to the above, Ld. DR submitted that the undisputedly and admittedly the notice was sent to the assessee through speed post under Article No. EU41939695IN on 30.8.2010 on the address “Mohalla Khanqua Shareef, Ambeta Peer, Saharanpur”. In this situation compliance of…