What is Pr. CIT v. Marg Ltd. authority for?

Profits cannot be estimated by the tax authorities unless the assessee's books of account have been formally rejected.

How many judgments cite Pr. CIT v. Marg Ltd.?

99 judgments on BharatTax cite Pr. CIT v. Marg Ltd. (396 ITR 580), spanning 2018 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Pr. CIT v. Marg Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 145(3), Section 44AB, Section 133A, Section 28, Section 69.

Pr. CIT v. Marg Ltd. (396 ITR 580)

DCIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.PAN India Network Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1716/MUM/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1716 & 1717/MUM/2020 (A.Ys: 2007-08 & 2006-07) DCIT – Central Circle – 7(1) v. M/s. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd., 135, Continental Building Room No. 653, 6th Floor Dr. Annie Besant Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AACCP2459H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 136 & 134/MUM/2021 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NOs. 1716 & 1717/MUM/2020 (A.Ys: 2007-08 & 2006-07)] M/s. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd…

Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2), Allahabad vs. Monad Infrasolution Limited, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose and the Cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 62/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad19 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2015-16 Income Tax Officer, V. Monad Infrasolution Limited, Ward-2(2), Allahabad C-80 Gtb Nagar Kareli, Allahabad, 211016 U.P. Pan-Aajcm2155J (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/Alld/2021 In Assessment Year: 2015-16 Monad Infrasolution Limited, V. Income Tax Officer, C-80 Gtb Nagar Kareli, Ward-2(2), Allahabad Allahabad, 211016 U.P. Pan-Aajcm2155J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Rabin Chaudhuri, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Mr. Ashish Bansal, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…ITA No. 62/ALLD/2020 and C.O. No. 01/ALLD/2021 (arising out of ITA No. 62/Alld/2020) Assessment Year 2015-16 Monad Infrasolution Lmt. Allahabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Income Tax Officer, v. Monad Infrasolution Limited, Ward-2(2), Allahabad C-80 GTB Nagar Kareli, Allahabad, 211016 U.P. PAN-AAJCM2155J (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/ALLD/2021 In Assessment Year: 2015-16 Monad Infrasolution Limited, v. Income Tax Officer, C-80 GTB Nagar Kareli, Ward-2(2), All…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1167/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

M/S. Raj Enterprise, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Surat

ITA 1166/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Raj Enterprises, Surat

ITA 1164/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1167/AHD/2016 (AY 2010-11) (Hearing in Virtual Court) Raj Enterprises, Deputy Commissioner of 7-Nitinagar Society, Income Tax, Vs Opp. VasantVihar Society, Circle-2(3), Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M The Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee The Deputy Commissioner of Raj Enterprises, Income Tax, 7-Nitinagar Society, Vs Circle-2(3), Surat. Opp. VasantVihar Society, UdhanaMagdalla Road, Surat – 395007 PAN: AAKFR 6024 M Appellant/ Revenue…

ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela vs. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 373/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

Section 143(3)

…a g e 16 | 62 ITA No.366/CTK/2018 C.O. No.01/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 the Income Tax Act. For this proposition, the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Marg Ltd., delivered on 20.07.2017, reported in 396 ITR 580. The relevant portion of the judgement reads as under: “In para 45 (3) of the above order, it is mentioned that where the AO is not satisfied about the correctness or completion of the account of the assessee, or where method of account provided in sub section (1) has not been regularly followed by the assessee or income has not been computed in…

Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

Section 143(3)

…a g e 16 | 62 ITA No.366/CTK/2018 C.O. No.01/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 the Income Tax Act. For this proposition, the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Marg Ltd., delivered on 20.07.2017, reported in 396 ITR 580. The relevant portion of the judgement reads as under: “In para 45 (3) of the above order, it is mentioned that where the AO is not satisfied about the correctness or completion of the account of the assessee, or where method of account provided in sub section (1) has not been regularly followed by the assessee or income has not been computed in…

The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. N.R. Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vapi

In the result the ground No

ITA 1526/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, सुरत"ायपीठ, सुरत INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Hearing) I.T.(SS)A’s No.14,15,16/AHD/2016, ITA’s No.1302,1303& 3032/AHD/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Plot No.169 to 169, Phase No.1, Surat. GIDC, Vapi. [PAN: AAACN 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.(SS).A’s No. 46,47,48,49,1526 & 1527/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2012-13 The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Surat…

N.R. Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vapi vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 1302/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, सुरत"ायपीठ, सुरत INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Hearing) I.T.(SS)A’s No.14,15,16/AHD/2016, ITA’s No.1302,1303& 3032/AHD/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Plot No.169 to 169, Phase No.1, Surat. GIDC, Vapi. [PAN: AAACN 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.(SS).A’s No. 46,47,48,49,1526 & 1527/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2012-13 The ACIT/DCIT, Circle-3, Surat…

M/S. Pratham Properties, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(2), Baroda

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1404/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1404/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 M/S Pratham Properties, D.C.I.T., “Pratham”, Vs. Circle-2(2), Makarand Desai Road, Vadodara. Nr. Mother’S School, Baroda-390007. Pan: Aahfp5012C

For Appellant: Shri Nirmit Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R

Section 234BSection 271Section 80

…ific defect in the books of accounts Asstt. Year 2008-09 6 of the assessee there cannot be any addition based on estimate to the total income of the assessee. 9.4 We also find that Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Marg Limited reported in 396 ITR 580 has held as under: “there is no merit whatsoever in the appeal filed by the Revenue as the addition of income on estimate basis for certain projects has admittedly/concededly (as admitted/conceded by the Revenue before ITAT) been done without scrutiny and without rejecting the Books of Accounts.” 9.5 From the above, there remains no ambiguity th…

M/S Mojika Real Estate & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the sole ground of appeal taken by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1429/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar (CIT)

Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 145(3)

…ailed to point out even a single discrepancy in books of accounts recasted and audited by qualified chartered accountants. In support, reliance was placed on the following decisions: • CIT v. Forech India Ltd. 329 ITR 336 (Delhi) • Principal CIT Vs. Marg Ltd. 396 ITR 580 (Bom) • Asstt. CIT vs. Intermedia Cable Communication (P) Ltd. 146 TTJ 476 (Pune) • Ajanta Construction (P) Ltd.V/s ACIT XXI TW 606 (ITAT Jaipur) • St. Teresa’s Oil Mills v. State of Kerala, (1970) 76 ITR 365 (Ker) 39. It was further submitted that the lump sum/ adhoc addition of Rs.50.00 lakhs was made solely for possible leakage of revenue. It…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S Mojika Real Estate & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the sole ground of appeal taken by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1236/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar (CIT)

Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 145(3)

…ailed to point out even a single discrepancy in books of accounts recasted and audited by qualified chartered accountants. In support, reliance was placed on the following decisions: • CIT v. Forech India Ltd. 329 ITR 336 (Delhi) • Principal CIT Vs. Marg Ltd. 396 ITR 580 (Bom) • Asstt. CIT vs. Intermedia Cable Communication (P) Ltd. 146 TTJ 476 (Pune) • Ajanta Construction (P) Ltd.V/s ACIT XXI TW 606 (ITAT Jaipur) • St. Teresa’s Oil Mills v. State of Kerala, (1970) 76 ITR 365 (Ker) 39. It was further submitted that the lump sum/ adhoc addition of Rs.50.00 lakhs was made solely for possible leakage of revenue. It…

Shri Ramesh Kumar Rajpal, Ujjain vs. ACIT1(1), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 91/IND/2018[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Nov 2019AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 1999-2000

Section 145(3)Section 37(1)

…[ITA No.91/Ind/2018] [Shri Ramesh Kumar Rajpal, Ujjain] आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE “SMC” BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Shri Ramesh Kumar Rajpal ACIT-1(1) Prop. M/s. Ramesh Medical Stores Ujjain बनाम/ Bagadia Tower Vs. Kotwali road Ujjain (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AADFB3454E Appellant by Shri Sumit Nema & Shri Gagan Tiwari, A.Rs Respondent by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 21.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 27.11.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal by the assessee is…

Sri G.T. Umesh, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Chitradurga

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

ITA 1321/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, JCIT (DR)

Section 144Section 145Section 234BSection 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri G.T. Umesh, BSP Compound, The Income Tax Behind Hotel Surya, Officer, vs. Hiriyur Tk., Chitradurga Ward 1, District. Chitradurga. PAN: AAOPU6237B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.R. Narayana, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 21.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 O R D E R Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member This appeal is filed by the assessee and the same is directed against…