P.S.Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors.

209 ITR 821High Court1994#4635 most cited

What is P.S.Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors. authority for?

An assessment based on auctioneer records without allowing the assessee to cross-examine the auctioneer violates natural justice and renders the assessment invalid. Reassessment proceedings initiated without proper satisfaction and sanction from a superior authority under Section 151 are erroneous.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PS Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer · 209 ITR 821 · natural justice · cross-examination · auctioneer records · reassessment · Section 151 · satisfaction · sanction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153ASection 147Section 148Section 69CSection 149Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationonus of proofsection 153(c)section 164third party informationincome tax settlement commissionsection 31

Judgments citing P.S.Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors.

Lasco Chemie Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), New Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…Ram: AIR 1974 SC 2335 - Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal: 167 ITR 498 (SC) - CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta: 207 CTR 115 (Del) - Sona Electric Company v. CIT: 152 ITR 507 (Del) - CIT v. Eastern Commercial: 210 ITR 103, 110 (Cal) - P.S. Abdul Majeed v. STO 209 ITR 821. 823 (Ker) - CIT v. Sham Lal: 127 ITR 816 (P&H) P a g e | 21 Lasco Chemie (P) Ltd. (AY 2012-13) - Mukand Singh and Sons v. Presiding Officer: 107 STC 300 (P&H) - Anupam Agencies v. State of Punjab: 98 STC 338 (P&H) - Prakash Chand Mehta v. CIT: 220 ITR 277, 279 (MP) - CTT v. D.M.Doshi: 239 ITR 315 (Guj) - Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF): 263 ITR (AT…

M/S Ls Contractors Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 30, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

ITA 2208/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153CSection 234ASection 270A

…ITA Nos. 2207 & 2208/DEL/2025 M/S LS CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S LS CONTRACTORS DCIT, PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. ARA Centre, PAN No.AABCL8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri M P Rastogi, Advocate & Shri Shivam Malik,…

M/S Ls Contractors Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 30, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

ITA 2207/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153CSection 234ASection 270A

…ITA Nos. 2207 & 2208/DEL/2025 M/S LS CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S LS CONTRACTORS DCIT, PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. ARA Centre, PAN No.AABCL8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri M P Rastogi, Advocate & Shri Shivam Malik,…

Shahnaj, Near Bherudanji Well vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Income Tax Office

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 712/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Dr Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Shanaj Vs The Ito W/O Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Fpmps 3570 D

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50CSection 54F

…records of a auctioneer without giving the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the auctioneer has been held violating the principle of natural justice and the assessment was not valid and liable to be quashed [PS Abdul Majid Vs. AGIT — STO — reported in 209 ITR 821]. Since in the assessment proceedings, procedure of law is not followed, therefore, the same should be held as null and void. (Ground No. 8) On the facts and circumstances of the case and law also Learned Assessing Officer grossly erred in initiating reassessment proceeding without obtaining proper satisfaction and sanction from the superior auth…

Gemco International, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 410/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 410/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s. Gemco International cuke The ITO Vs. 3950, Lal Haweli, MSB Ka Rasta Ward 2(1) Johari Bazar, Jaipur 302 003 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFG 9238 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Vivek Bhargava, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR…

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

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

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

…49 (SC) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyansundaram affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court reported in 282 ITR 259 iv) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar v) 163 ITR 249 (Guj) CIT vs. M.K. Brothers vi) 300 ITR 426 (All.) CIT vs. Salek Chand vii) 209 ITR 821 (Kerala) P.S. Abdul Majeed vs. Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Officer viii) 220 Taxman 168 (Del.) CIT vs. Prem Prakash Magpal ix) ITA 984/2019 dated 4.3.2024 PCIT vs. Rashmi Rajiv Mehta (pages 404-408 of JPB-II) x) 148 TTJ 517 (Hyd) Smt. K.V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi vs. ACIT xi) ITA No. 208 of 2011 dated 12.09.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax…

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

…49 (SC) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyansundaram affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court reported in 282 ITR 259 iv) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar v) 163 ITR 249 (Guj) CIT vs. M.K. Brothers vi) 300 ITR 426 (All.) CIT vs. Salek Chand vii) 209 ITR 821 (Kerala) P.S. Abdul Majeed vs. Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Officer viii) 220 Taxman 168 (Del.) CIT vs. Prem Prakash Magpal ix) ITA 984/2019 dated 4.3.2024 PCIT vs. Rashmi Rajiv Mehta (pages 404-408 of JPB-II) x) 148 TTJ 517 (Hyd) Smt. K.V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi vs. ACIT xi) ITA No. 208 of 2011 dated 12.09.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax…

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

…49 (SC) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyansundaram affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court reported in 282 ITR 259 iv) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar v) 163 ITR 249 (Guj) CIT vs. M.K. Brothers vi) 300 ITR 426 (All.) CIT vs. Salek Chand vii) 209 ITR 821 (Kerala) P.S. Abdul Majeed vs. Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Officer viii) 220 Taxman 168 (Del.) CIT vs. Prem Prakash Magpal ix) ITA 984/2019 dated 4.3.2024 PCIT vs. Rashmi Rajiv Mehta (pages 404-408 of JPB-II) x) 148 TTJ 517 (Hyd) Smt. K.V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi vs. ACIT xi) ITA No. 208 of 2011 dated 12.09.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax…

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

…49 (SC) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyansundaram affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court reported in 282 ITR 259 iv) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) Addl. CIT vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar v) 163 ITR 249 (Guj) CIT vs. M.K. Brothers vi) 300 ITR 426 (All.) CIT vs. Salek Chand vii) 209 ITR 821 (Kerala) P.S. Abdul Majeed vs. Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Officer viii) 220 Taxman 168 (Del.) CIT vs. Prem Prakash Magpal ix) ITA 984/2019 dated 4.3.2024 PCIT vs. Rashmi Rajiv Mehta (pages 404-408 of JPB-II) x) 148 TTJ 517 (Hyd) Smt. K.V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi vs. ACIT xi) ITA No. 208 of 2011 dated 12.09.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax…

DCIT - 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rupa Infotech & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3597/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 3596 & 3597/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2013-14) DCIT – 14(3)(1) v. M/s. Rupa Properties and Securities Pvt. Ltd., 401, Rupa Plaza, Above IDBI Bank Room No. 455, 4th Floor Jawahar Road, Ghatkopar(E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400077 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACR7176F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shankarlal Jain Department by : Shri T. Shankar Date of Hearing : 30.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rupa Properties & Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3596/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 3596 & 3597/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2013-14) DCIT – 14(3)(1) v. M/s. Rupa Properties and Securities Pvt. Ltd., 401, Rupa Plaza, Above IDBI Bank Room No. 455, 4th Floor Jawahar Road, Ghatkopar(E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400077 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACR7176F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shankarlal Jain Department by : Shri T. Shankar Date of Hearing : 30.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jainam Investments, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…tries or cross examine the agent and the entries not having been proved nor the agent examined, the order of the Board of Revenue was not justified. 23.11 The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in P.S. Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income tax & Sales Tax Officer [1994] 209 ITR 821 in a writ petition by the Petitioner-Assessee held that there were two inspections of the Petitioner's -holdings on November 3, 1981, and on September 19, 1985, before and after the assessment year in question, when the inspecting authorities estimated the yield of cardamom from the petitioner's holdings at 180 Kgs. The order of reassessment was…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 923/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

…o provide cross-examination; but same was not provided thus defying the principles of Natural Justice and is supported in favor of assessee by the following decisions:- i. Kishinchand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC) ii. P.S. Abdul Majeed v. Agrl. ITandSTO [1994] 209 ITR 821 (Ker.) ii. CITv. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal.) iv. Hirji Nagji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 286 (Ori.) 25 IT(SS)A No.83,84,86,87,90,91, 109,110 & ITA, No.922 &923/Ind/2019 AG8 Ventures Ltd. v. J.K Synthetics Ltd. v. ITO [1986] 19 ITD 102 (Delhi) vi. CIT v. Biju Patnaik [1991] 190 ITR 396 (Ori.)”. It is unknown why…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 922/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

…o provide cross-examination; but same was not provided thus defying the principles of Natural Justice and is supported in favor of assessee by the following decisions:- i. Kishinchand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC) ii. P.S. Abdul Majeed v. Agrl. ITandSTO [1994] 209 ITR 821 (Ker.) ii. CITv. Eastern Commercial Enterprises [1994] 210 ITR 103 (Cal.) iv. Hirji Nagji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 286 (Ori.) 25 IT(SS)A No.83,84,86,87,90,91, 109,110 & ITA, No.922 &923/Ind/2019 AG8 Ventures Ltd. v. J.K Synthetics Ltd. v. ITO [1986] 19 ITD 102 (Delhi) vi. CIT v. Biju Patnaik [1991] 190 ITR 396 (Ori.)”. It is unknown why…

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1474/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…on of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee cannot be expected to give reply to the statement without going through the same in detail and prepare its counter thereon. Hence it could be safely concluded…

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1473/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…on of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee cannot be expected to give reply to the statement without going through the same in detail and prepare its counter thereon. Hence it could be safely concluded…

Rajda Polymers, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-36, Kolkata

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2414/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 16Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

…of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court In the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Ca I) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the Id AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee cannot be expected to give reply to the statement without going through the same in detail and prepare its counter thereon. Hence it could be safely concluded…

Raj Karan Dassani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2346/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2346/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Raj Karan Dassani......………………..………………………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [Pan : Adnpd 8826 B] Ito, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Respondent.

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 16Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

…on of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material rather he merely allowed the assessee to read the statement. This, in our considered opinion, was not justified. The assessee cannot be expected to give reply to the statement without going through the same in detail and prepare its counter thereon. Hence it could be safely concluded…

Rakesh Kumar Saraf, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1053/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1053/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rakesh Kumar Saraf.....…..……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant C/O Skrk Marketing (India) Pvt. Ltd. 19, Armenian Street 1St Floor Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Ajaps 3157 R] Income Tax Officer, Ward-36(1), Kolkata...............................…………….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 10(38)Section 250

…as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the show cause notice.” Similar propositions of law have been laid down in the following case-law:-  P.S. Abdul majeed vs. Agricultural Income-Tax and Sales Tax Officer and others 209 ITR 821 (Ker.)  CIT vs. Easter Commercial Enterprises 210 ITR 103 (Cal)  Asst. CIT vs. Ajnara India Ltd. (2011) 49 DTR 273 (Del-Trib) 19. On similar facts where the revenue has alleged that the assessee has declared bogus LTCG, it was held as follows: a) The CALCUTTA HIGH COURT in the case of BLB CABLES & CONDUCTORS [ITA No. 78 of 2017] dated 19.06.201…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…llowed to cross-examine the said deponents and no further enquiry was made and therefore assessment suffers from procedural irregularities, defects and infirmities, matter is remanded to the A.O for fresh consideration.‖  P. S. Abdul Majeed, (Kerala) (1994) [209 ITR 821]: Held as under: ―…He had also prayed for an opportunity to cross-examine the auctioneers. When such a request was made it was incumbent on the officer to afford opportunity to the assessee to cross-examine the authors of those books. The petitioner had been denied the reasonable opportunity which was due in law, in relation to the assessment, a…

P.S.Abdul Majeed v. Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors. (209 ITR 821) — Cited in 25 Judgments | BharatTax