Pepsico India Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

50 Taxmann.com 299High Court2014#1188 most cited

What is Pepsico India Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT authority for?

Possession of photocopies of documents by a searched person does not automatically imply that the original documents belong to them, which is a crucial distinction for assuming jurisdiction under Section 153C for assessment of a person other than the searched person.

95

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pepsico India Holdings · Section 153C · Section 132 · search and seizure · jurisdiction · photocopies of documents · documents belonging · searched person · assessment of other person · satisfaction note

Also reported as

270 CTR 467228 Taxmann 1162014 SCC OnLine DEL 4155

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Pepsico India Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vinod Bahal, Ghaziabad

ITA 1857/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assistant Cit, Vs. Shri Vinod Bahal, Central Cir-2, Ka-11, Kavi Nagar, New Delhi. Ghaziabad (Up) (Pan: Acdpb2262N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Obj. No. 208/Del/2012 ( Ita No. 1857/Del/2012) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Vinod Bahal, Vs. Assistant Cit, Ka-11, Kavi Nagar, Central Circle-2, Ghaziabad (Up) New Delhi. (Pan: Acdpb2262N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Department By: Shri Kartar Singh, Cit( Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 07:03.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Revenue Has Questioned First Appellate Order On The Following Grounds: I) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.4,50,00,000 Made By The A.O. On Account Of 2 Undisclosed Capital Gain On Sale Of Shares Of M/S. Bahalsons Properties Pvt. Ltd. Ii) The Order Of The Learned Cit(Appeals) Is Erroneous & Is Not Tenable On Facts & In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kartar Singh, CIT( DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14(3)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 54E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assistant CIT, vs. Shri Vinod Bahal, Central Cir-2, KA-11, Kavi Nagar, New Delhi. Ghaziabad (UP) (PAN: ACDPB2262N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Obj. No. 208/Del/2012 ( ITA No. 1857/Del/2012) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Vinod Bahal, Vs. Assistant CIT, KA-11, Kavi Nagar, Central Circle-2, Ghaziabad (UP) New Delhi. (PAN: ACDPB2262N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Department by: Shri Kartar Singh, CIT( DR) Date of hearing : 09.12.2015 Date o…