Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT

49 ITR 561High Court1963#1586 most cited

What is Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT authority for?

An assessment is rendered void if the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-examine a third party whose adverse evidence is used against them. The Assessing Officer possesses powers akin to a civil court for summoning witnesses and enforcing their appearance.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,402 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT · Section 131 · cross-examination · natural justice · assessment void · adverse evidence · Assessing Officer powers · summon witness · Civil Procedure Code powers

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271econstruction pepenalty under section 271dcorpus fundsection 269ton money receiptsection 53joint development agreementsection 269sjdatrcsection 271e

Judgments citing Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…viii) ITA No. 3342/D/2013 ITO v. XO Infotech Ltd. ix) 163 Taxman 482 (Del) CIT vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd x) 296 ITR 750 (Del) CIT v V.B. Aggarwal xi) 99 ITR 268 (Del) CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd xii) 49 ITR 650 (All) EMC Works (P) Ltd v ITO xiii) 49 ITR 561 (All) Nathu Ram Premchand vs. CIT 18. It is submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) though has upheld the addition but in doing so he has not appreciated that in absence of rejection of books of accounts u/s 145(3) of the Act, no addition can be made to declared turnover as has held in paras 25 to 25.1 of this submission a…

Goodluck Metal Corporation, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1771/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Goodluck Metal Corporation, Assessing Officer Circle 19(1), 98, Khetwadi Main Road, Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400 004. Vs. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aaafg 1441 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Sanjiv Shah, Adv
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 153A

…on the decision of The Ld. counsel for the assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Nathu Ram High Court of Allahabad in the case of Nathu Ram High Court of Allahabad in the case of Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT 49 ITR 561 (Allahabad) where Premchand v. CIT 49 ITR 561 (Allahabad) wherein it is held that the in it is held that the Assessing Officer to exercise the authority under the Civil Procedure Assessing Officer to exercise the authority under the Civil Procedure Assessing Officer to exercise the authority under the Civil Procedure Code for enforce appearance of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Bharat Spun Pipe and Construction Company, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 360/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, (CIT) (V.C.)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153C

…examine a third party whose evidence is sought to be utilized would make the assessment void as held in the cases of KishinchandChellaram v. CIT [1980] 4 Taxman 29 (SC), Sona Electric Co. v. CIT [1984] 19 Taxman 160 (Delhi), Nathu Ram Prem Chand v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 561 (All). 39 ITA No. 360/JPR/2025 & CO No. 19/JPR/2025 Bharat Spun Pipe and Construction Co., Jaipur. Hence it is humbly submitted that the additions made by Id.AO are mere whims and fancies and without application of mind and therefore deserves to be deleted. Further Id.AO has acknowledged that the income of Rs.15,32,40,000/- has been properly de…

Mallya Real Estates P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-16(2), New Delhi

ITA 6158/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 68

…ITA No. 6158/DEL/2017 [A.Y. 2013-14] Mallya Real Estates Pvt Ltd Vs. The I.T.O IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E' BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6158/DEL/2017 [A.Y. 2013-14] Mallya Real Estates Pvt Ltd Vs. The I.T.O 103, Triveni Complex 2 Veer Savarkar Block, Madhuban Road Near Nirman Vihar Metro Station, Delhi Ward -16(2) New Delhi PAN - AAICM 0912 C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv Department By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearin…

Aakash Universal Limited ( Merged Entity Rajkiran Textiles Pvt Ltd), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 1197/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…of the investors for which the copies of director report, balance sheet, share application forms, etc. were filed during the course of assessment proceedings. In this regard, the Appellant relies on the following decisions: Nathu Ram Premchand vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 561 (All); CIT vs. Ponnuswamy Naidu (1995) 214 ITR 185 (Mad); CIT vs. S P Bhatt (1974) 97 ITR 440 (Guj). 11. Lastly, assuming without accepting, the parties from whom the Appellant had received the share application mоnеу are bogus than also the addition u/s.68 of the Act cannot be made as the Appellant has provided identity of the said shareholders a…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

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)

…he 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 surmise and suspicion. It is a well settled proposition that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof and…

Rewin Ceramics Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 21(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 4580/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…t. 1. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Real Time Marketing (P.) Ltd. (Delhi HC) reported in 306 ITR 35 2. Food Corporation of India vs. Provident Fund Commissioner and Anr. (SC) reported in 1990 1 SCC 68. 3. Nathu Ram Premchand vs CIT (Allahabad HC) reported in 49 ITR 561 4. CIT vs Genesis Comment (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxman 482 5. Mehta Parikh & Co. vs. CIT (SC) reported in 30 ITR 181. PROPOSITION 6: Once assessee establishes the transaction with its creditors/lenders to be genuine and creditors identity and creditworthiness has been established, than the assessee is not suppose to know the source of source of…

Gaurav Dhanrajgir Verma, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 325/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 147Section 44A

…y case issued the notices u/s 131 of the Act before having made the assessment and representing credits through account payee cheques in the bank account as per the mandate of the High Court of Allahabad in the case of Nathu Ram Premchand vs. CIT, reported in 49 ITR 561.” 3. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1.92 Cr. u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 owing to non-compliance and non- furnishing of the details. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. While dismissing the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) held as under: “On appraisal of these details, I fin…

Forever Flourishing Fin. & Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC)-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6120/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 6040 & 6120/MUM/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Forever Flourishing Fin. & DCIT(CC)-3(4), Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(4), Room No. Vs. A-401, Pearl Arcade, Off J P 1915, 19th floor, Air India Road, Dawood Baug Lane, Building, Nariman Point, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400058. PAN NO. AAACF 4311 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay Daga Revenue by : Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR : Date of Hearing 13/07/2023 Date o…

Forever Flourishing Fin & Inv. Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6040/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 6040 & 6120/MUM/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Forever Flourishing Fin. & DCIT(CC)-3(4), Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(4), Room No. Vs. A-401, Pearl Arcade, Off J P 1915, 19th floor, Air India Road, Dawood Baug Lane, Building, Nariman Point, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400058. PAN NO. AAACF 4311 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay Daga Revenue by : Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR : Date of Hearing 13/07/2023 Date o…

DCIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 5123/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, Adv
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…ence thereof no adverse inference could have been drawn against the assessee:- (a) CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. 163 Taxman 482 (Del) (b) CIT Vs. V. B. Aggarwal 296 ITR 750 (Del) (c) EMC Works (P) Ltd Vs. ITO 49 ITR 650 (All) (d) Nathu Ram Premchand Vs. CIT 49 ITR 561 (All) (e) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) (f) CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Del). 13. On the other hand, the ld. DR submits that in the loose papers and the diary seized the names are mentioned, dates are mentioned, amounts are mentioned and, therefore, it is not a dumb document. The ld. DR submits that…

Brahmaputra Infraprojects Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 4123/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, Adv
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…ence thereof no adverse inference could have been drawn against the assessee:- (a) CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. 163 Taxman 482 (Del) (b) CIT Vs. V. B. Aggarwal 296 ITR 750 (Del) (c) EMC Works (P) Ltd Vs. ITO 49 ITR 650 (All) (d) Nathu Ram Premchand Vs. CIT 49 ITR 561 (All) (e) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) (f) CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Del). 13. On the other hand, the ld. DR submits that in the loose papers and the diary seized the names are mentioned, dates are mentioned, amounts are mentioned and, therefore, it is not a dumb document. The ld. DR submits that…

Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 4122/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, Adv
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…ence thereof no adverse inference could have been drawn against the assessee:- (a) CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. 163 Taxman 482 (Del) (b) CIT Vs. V. B. Aggarwal 296 ITR 750 (Del) (c) EMC Works (P) Ltd Vs. ITO 49 ITR 650 (All) (d) Nathu Ram Premchand Vs. CIT 49 ITR 561 (All) (e) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) (f) CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Del). 13. On the other hand, the ld. DR submits that in the loose papers and the diary seized the names are mentioned, dates are mentioned, amounts are mentioned and, therefore, it is not a dumb document. The ld. DR submits that…