Pandit Bros. v. CIT

26 ITR 159High Court1954#2416 most cited

What is Pandit Bros. v. CIT authority for?

Low profits alone, or minor defects such as the non-maintenance of a stock register, do not justify the rejection of regularly maintained books of account under Section 145, nor do they permit additions to income without proving specific errors.

48

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pandit Bros v CIT · 26 ITR 159 · rejection of books of account · Section 145 · Section 145(3) · low profits · non-maintenance of stock register · additions to income · errors in audited books · assessment procedure

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 10(23FB)Section 115BBESection 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

rejection of books of accountsection 145(3)section 145section 131section 139(1)section 13section 68section 142(1)previous yearsection 143(2)companytransfer

Judgments citing Pandit Bros. v. CIT

NIDHI RANI,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1, PANIPAT, PANIPAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3323/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Smt. Nidhi Rani Vs Ito 1361, Sector-25, Part-Ii Ward-1, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Panipat Pan-Arrpr9400P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2025 Order

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 68

…year under appeal which cannot be achieved without reducing the profit margins. He, therefore, requested that the additions made deserves to be deleted. Reliance is placed on the judgement of Hon’ble Punjab High Court in the case of Pandit Pros. Vs CIT [1954] 26 ITR 159 (Punjab) and the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Agson Global P.Ltd. [2020] 115 taxmann.com 342 (Del.Trib.). 29. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of lower authorities and submits that assessee has failed to controvert the findings of AO before Ld. CIT(A) or at this stage…

ARBUDA TEXTILE MILL,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1906/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 145

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1906/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Arbuda Textile Mill, Vs. AO, NFAC, Delhi B/h. Sitaram Textile, Present Jurisdiction: Vill: Saijpur, Gopalpur, Vatva, Deputy Commissioner of Ahmedabad-382405 Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad [PAN No.ABEFA9083A] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR 10.12.2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 16.12.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: T…

SHRI DEVENDRA THAKERSHIBHAI THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.587/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2913-14 Devendra Thakershibhai The Ito बनाम/ Thakkar Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Prop. Of Prism Agri Ahmedabad – 380 015 Tradelink Ravjipura Nava Bazar, Bavla Tal: Dascroi Ahmedabad – 380 057 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aospt 8109 B अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 145(2)

…dents including the following case laws: • Suresh Chand Talera v. CIT (MP HC) reported in 73 CCH 1034 where it was held that rejection of books is permissible only if they are incomplete or unreliable. • Pandit Brothers v. CIT ( P and H HC) reported at (1954) 26 ITR 159) where it was held that Low profits alone cannot justify the rejection of books. • Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills v. CIT (SC) noted in 26 FIR 775: Where Apex Court held that additions based on guesswork without evidence cannot be sustained. Shri Devendra Thakershibhai Thakkar vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2013-14 7 • Minal Intermediates (ITA No.594/Ahd/2023) W…

SATISH CHAND GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

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

ITA 211/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 145(3)Section 250Section 69A

…CIT maintains regular account books which are not found to be incorrect, the mere fact that a stock register is not maintained and book profit is considered by the AO as low may provoke an enquiry, but they may not be sufficient to justify action u/s. 145. 7 26 ITR 159 Pandit Brothers vs. The AO cannot say that merely CIT because there is no stock register the account books must be false. 8 (1973) 87 ITR 395 (SC) CIT vs .K.S. Kannan The hon’ble supreme court held, Kunhi “where explanation of the assessee was not absurd and it was capable of being examined, I.T. authority acted arbitrarily in rejecting the explan…

DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S SYMBIOSIS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 326/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80I

…that too without rejecting the books of account regularly maintained by the assessee. 18.4 On the issue that no addition in GP can be made without observing errors in audited books of account, the following decisions are eloquent : i) Pandit Bros vs. CIT 26 ITR 159 ( P&H) ii) CIT vs Maharaja Shree Umed Mills Ltd 192 ITR 563 (Raj) iii) CIT vs. K.S.Bhatia 125 Taxman 454 (P&H) ITA 326/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 37 iv) CIT Vs Poonam Rani 326 ITR 223 18.5 On merits also, the stand taken by the assessee for the fall in GP during the year is not a totally unpalatable stand. The assessee has maintained, as noted by b…

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 89/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

Section 12ASection 138Section 144Section 145

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT 1(1) M/s. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) PAN: AABCN8230F Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Respondent by Shri S.S. Solanki, AR Date of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 08.06.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 14.09.2020 of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)-III Indore fo…

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 1/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…earlier. In this regard, reliance is placed on: • In Ramchindra Ramniwas V/s State of Orissa (1970) 25 STC 501(Ori) it was held that the account books of the assessee cannot be rejected merely on the ground of low profits. • In Pandit Brothers V/s CIT, (1954)26 ITR 159 (Punj), S. Veereah Reddiar V/s CIT, (1960) 38 ITR 152 (Ker), M. Durai Raj v/s CIT (1972) 83 ITR 484 (Ker), it was held that the books of the accounts of the assessee cannot be rejected where profits disclosed were low and there was no stock register. • In International forest company V/s CIT (1975) 101 ITR 721 (J&K) it was held that the books of t…

M/S SHRI SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 279/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…earlier. In this regard, reliance is placed on: • In Ramchindra Ramniwas V/s State of Orissa (1970) 25 STC 501(Ori) it was held that the account books of the assessee cannot be rejected merely on the ground of low profits. • In Pandit Brothers V/s CIT, (1954)26 ITR 159 (Punj), S. Veereah Reddiar V/s CIT, (1960) 38 ITR 152 (Ker), M. Durai Raj v/s CIT (1972) 83 ITR 484 (Ker), it was held that the books of the accounts of the assessee cannot be rejected where profits disclosed were low and there was no stock register. • In International forest company V/s CIT (1975) 101 ITR 721 (J&K) it was held that the books of t…

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 116/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…earlier. In this regard, reliance is placed on: • In Ramchindra Ramniwas V/s State of Orissa (1970) 25 STC 501(Ori) it was held that the account books of the assessee cannot be rejected merely on the ground of low profits. • In Pandit Brothers V/s CIT, (1954)26 ITR 159 (Punj), S. Veereah Reddiar V/s CIT, (1960) 38 ITR 152 (Ker), M. Durai Raj v/s CIT (1972) 83 ITR 484 (Ker), it was held that the books of the accounts of the assessee cannot be rejected where profits disclosed were low and there was no stock register. • In International forest company V/s CIT (1975) 101 ITR 721 (J&K) it was held that the books of t…

M/S. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…ssessee, is not justified. The mere fact that there was a lower rate of gross profit declared by an assessee as compared to the previous year would not by itself be sufficient to justify the addition. 28.13 The Punjab High Court in Pandit Bros v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 159 held that to reject the accounts there must be a definite finding of the ITO for which there must be definite material before him to come to such a finding. Mere absence of stock register or insufficiency of profits cannot be material to reject the accounts. 28.14. The Jammu and Kashmir High Court in International Forest Co. v. CIT 1975) 101 I…

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…ssessee, is not justified. The mere fact that there was a lower rate of gross profit declared by an assessee as compared to the previous year would not by itself be sufficient to justify the addition. 28.13 The Punjab High Court in Pandit Bros v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 159 held that to reject the accounts there must be a definite finding of the ITO for which there must be definite material before him to come to such a finding. Mere absence of stock register or insufficiency of profits cannot be material to reject the accounts. 28.14. The Jammu and Kashmir High Court in International Forest Co. v. CIT 1975) 101 I…

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…ssessee, is not justified. The mere fact that there was a lower rate of gross profit declared by an assessee as compared to the previous year would not by itself be sufficient to justify the addition. 28.13 The Punjab High Court in Pandit Bros v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 159 held that to reject the accounts there must be a definite finding of the ITO for which there must be definite material before him to come to such a finding. Mere absence of stock register or insufficiency of profits cannot be material to reject the accounts. 28.14. The Jammu and Kashmir High Court in International Forest Co. v. CIT 1975) 101 I…

M/S. GLOBAL SYNTEX,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 571/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

Section 145Section 254(1)

…e ld.AR for the assessee prayed for deleting the entire Gross Profit additions. To support all his submissions the ld AR for the assessee also relied on the following decisions;  Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT ( 26 ITR 775 SC),  Pandit Brothers Vs CIT (26 ITR 159 Punj),  Jhandumal Tarachand Rice Mills Vs CIT ( 73 ITR 192). 4. On the other hand, the ld.Sr.DR for the Revenue supported the order of Lower Authorities. The ld.Sr.DR further submits that during the year under consideration the AO in the show cause notice specifically mentioned that no day to day stock were maintained. As no day to day stock was…

M/S SHUBHAM COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,ELLENABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1416/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Oct 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234Section 234B

…ITR 13 (Del) • CIT Vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 999/2010 dated 03.08.2010 • CIT Vs. Smt. Poonam Rani 326 ITR 223 (Del) • CIT Vs. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 324 ITR 95 • ITO Vs. Somsons & Co., 148 Taxman 21 (Asr) (Mag) • Pandit Bors. Vs. CIT 26 ITR 159 (Punj) • S. Veeriah Reddiar Vs. CIT 38 ITR 152 (Ker) • P. Venkanna Vs. CIT 72 ITR 328 (Mys) • R.V.S. and Sons Dairy Farm Vs. CIT 257 ITR 764 (Mad) • CIT Vs. Superior Crafts in ITA No. 244/2009, 547/2011, 548/2011 and 615/2011(Del) dt. 06/03/2012 • CIT Vs. Jacksons House 198 Taxman 385 (Del) • CIT Vs. Winner Constructions (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 796/20…

SHRI MOHAN LAL BARGOTI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1462/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1462/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 Shri Mohan Lal Bargoti, Cuke A.C.I.T. Vs. 1-A-1, 1-A-2, Subhash Colony, Circle-4, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abzpb 7893 C Appellant Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 14/11/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 44ASection 69

…aforesaid facts there was no case for rejecting the books of accounts u/s 145(3). The Ld. A.O. was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts on very trivial matters. He has relied on the following judicial pronouncements: i. Pandit Bros. V. CIT, (1954) 26 ITR 159 (Punjab); ii. S. Veeriah Reddiar V. CIT, (1960) 38 ITR 152 (Kerala); iii. M. Durai Raj V. CIT, (1972) 83 ITR 484 (Kerala). iv. CIT Vs. Gotan Lime 256 ITR 243 (Rajasthan) v. Vishal Infrastructure Ltd. Assessment CIT [2007] 11 SOT 386/104 ITD 537(Hyd.). vi. Narsing Das Ram Kisan Vs. ACIT 272 ITR 467 The ld AR has further submitted that even if books…

SMT. SWAPNA MANNA,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. PR.CIT-9, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1072/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…ccording to Ld. AR, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Ashoka Refractories (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 279 ITR 457 (Cal), while approving the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the 9 Smt. Swapna Manna, AY 2014-15 case of Pandit Brothers 26 ITR 159 (Punj), has held that books of account cannot be rejected merely due to low GP the relevant finding is reproduced here: “6.7. We may draw support for our views from the decisions relied upon by Mr. Khaitan. In Pandit Bros. v. CIT (supra), the Punjab High Court in a Division Bench held that in order to reject the accounts, the ITO must either hold…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SUNIL NAYYAR, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 6168/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 68

…that a proper ITA No. 6168/Del/2016 & 17 CO No. 9/Del/2017 Sunil Nayyar statement of income, could not be deduced, in that event AO is not entitled to estimate the profit". Chhabildas Shah vs. CIT 59 ITR 733 (SC). a. In the case of Pandit Brothers vs. CIT 26 ITR 159 (Pun) Hon'ble supreme court has as explained the basic principles for invoking section 145(3) and has clarified in clear terms that unless a clear satisfaction with regard to inaccuracy of books of accounts is recorded in absolute terms in the body of assessment order, the assessment framed is bad in law. While explaining the principle Apex Court…

PATHAK ROADLINES,PALWAL vs. ITO WARD -II(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2941/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Nippun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR

…t the lower profit shown by the assessee by itself cannot be a ground for rejection of the books of account results, as per the ratio laid down in the following cases: I. S. N. NamasivayamChettiar v. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 579 (SC); II. Pandit Bros. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 159 (P&H); III. S. VeeriahReddiar v. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 152 (Ker); IV. International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J&K). (9) That merely because net profit margin is lower in the instant assessment year under appeal vis-a-vis preceding assessment year cannot be a ground of additions to the income of the assessee unless the Revenue points out p…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2451/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…t maintain the stock registers, then also its books of accounts cannot be rejected. The assessee to support its contentions referred to the following judgments: Page 15 of 36 ITA nos.1517 & 2451/AHD/2016 Asstt. Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 (a) Pundit Bros V CIT 26 ITR 159 (Punj) (b) Ashoke Refactories (P) Ltd v CIT 279 ITR 457 (Cul) 13.6 The assessee further submitted that the AO has not pointed out any material defects in its books of accounts. Therefore the AO was under the obligation to accept the results shown by the assessee in its books of accounts. The assessee in support of his contention referred the follo…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1517/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…t maintain the stock registers, then also its books of accounts cannot be rejected. The assessee to support its contentions referred to the following judgments: Page 15 of 36 ITA nos.1517 & 2451/AHD/2016 Asstt. Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 (a) Pundit Bros V CIT 26 ITR 159 (Punj) (b) Ashoke Refactories (P) Ltd v CIT 279 ITR 457 (Cul) 13.6 The assessee further submitted that the AO has not pointed out any material defects in its books of accounts. Therefore the AO was under the obligation to accept the results shown by the assessee in its books of accounts. The assessee in support of his contention referred the follo…

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3