One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT

M/S. BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST REALTORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST REALTORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY REALTORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY REALTORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY DEVELOPERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY PROJECTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST CITY PROJECTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

M/S. BEST INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…he case of SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (supra). The relevant finding of their Lordships is in paragraph 6 of the order. The same is reproduced below:- “6. Learned counsel for the revenue relied upon One-up Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. R.R. Singh, CIT [2003] 262 ITR 275 to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessee without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statement being tes…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX XIII vs. RADHEY SHYAM BANSAL

…aside the block assessment and that is why the Revenue is before us in an appeal under Section 260A of the Act. 5. Learned Counsel for the Revenue relied upon One- up Shares and Stock Brokers P. Ltd. vs. R. R. Singh, CIT (2003) 183 CTR (Bom) 254 : (2003) 262 ITR 275 (Bom) to contend that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value, as observed by the Bombay High Court. There is no doubt that the statement of Manoj Aggarwal had evidentiary value but weight could not be given to it in proceedings against the assessed without it being tested under cross-examination. In the absence of the statem…