Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia

395 ITR 526High Court2017#35 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia authority for?

In search assessments under Section 153A, additions to income are permissible only if incriminating material is found during the search; in the absence of such material, completed assessments cannot be disturbed. A statement recorded under Section 132(4) and later retracted may not, on its own, constitute sufficient incriminating evidence for making additions.

1,215

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia · 395 ITR 526 · search assessment · Section 153A · Section 132(4) · incriminating material · retracted statement · completed assessments · additions without incriminating evidence · Kabul Chawla principle

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 287248 Taxmann 384157 DTR 20

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 132(4)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 153(1)statement under section 132(4)retracted statementsection 132(1)section 153a(1)section 153bpanchnamasection 132asearch assessmentblock periodsection 158bsection 158

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2), PUNE vs. RAMESH PANNALAL RANKA, PUNE

In the result, the appeal in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 2944/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.31 & 32/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ramesh Pannalal Ranka Dcit, Central Circle 2(2), Plot No.42, Premnagar Society, Vs. Pune Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aazpr9440C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle 2(2), Ramesh Pannalal Ranka Pune Vs. Plot No.42, Premnagar Society, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aazpr9440C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora & Ca Sampada Ingale Department By : Shri Amit Bobde, Cit Date Of Hearing : 24-03-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2026

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora and CA Sampada IngaleFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos.31 & 32/PUN/2025 Assessment years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ramesh Pannalal Ranka DCIT, Central Circle 2(2), Plot No.42, Premnagar Society, Vs. Pune Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411037 PAN: AAZPR9440C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year : 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle 2(2), Ramesh Pannalal Ranka Pune Vs. Plot No.42, Premnagar Society, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411037 PAN: AAZPR9440C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora and CA Sampada Ingale Department…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2577/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: This Tribunal.

Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…e CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimin…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2576/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2575/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2574/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2573/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2571/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2570/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: This Tribunal. 2. Since, The Facts Are The Identical Across All The Appeals / For All The Assessment Years, Except For The Nature Of The Additions / Disallowances Varying In Few Of The Assessment Year(S) Before This Tribunal In The Present Batch Of 6 Appeals, The Appeal Arising From The A.Y. 2012-13 Is Being Taken Up As The Lead Case With The Consent Of The Both The Ld. Ar As Well As The Departmental Representatives. 3. The Brief Fact Of The Present Case Is That The Assessee, Shri Thanushkodi Narayanan, Is The Managing Director Of M/S.Annai Builders Real Estates Pvt Ltd. The Assessee Filed His Original Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 27.09.2012 In Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.24,87,430/-. 4. A Search & Seizure Operation Was Carried Out In Terms Of Section 132 Of The Act On 04.10.2017 In The Residential Premises Of The Assessee & Also In The Premises Of M/S.Annai Builders Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. In Which The Assessee Is The Managing Director. 5. Thereafter, A Notice U/S.153A Of The Act For The A.Y.2012-13 Was Issued On 25.09.2018 To The Assessee By The Assessing Officer (In Short “Ao”) & In Response To The Same, The Assessee Had Filed E-Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 17.08.2019 In Declaring Total Income Of Rs.14,53,440/-. :-3-:

Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO. 6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrimina…

JOTHI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2569/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…CIT (A) deleted the additions made by the AO.\n\n6. The ITAT has dismissed the Revenue's appeal relying essentially on the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Proprietor Ferns 'N' Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526\n\n7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz, that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, cannot obviously be treated as incrim…

M/S SINGLA BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS LIMITED,RUPNAGAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 487/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

…earch, however, the said seized document pointed that the assessee had been making construction expenditure outside the books of accounts. The guess-work could be resorted to as per the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (390 ITR 496). In the case of Chetan Das Lachman Das (254 CTR 392), it was held that seized material could be relied upon to draw inference that there could be similar transactions. Therefore, findings in respect of unaccounted expenditure incurred outside the books of account for some financial year could be extrapolated in respect of other projects being de…

M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 482/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

…earch, however, the said seized document pointed that the assessee had been making construction expenditure outside the books of accounts. The guess-work could be resorted to as per the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (390 ITR 496). In the case of Chetan Das Lachman Das (254 CTR 392), it was held that seized material could be relied upon to draw inference that there could be similar transactions. Therefore, findings in respect of unaccounted expenditure incurred outside the books of account for some financial year could be extrapolated in respect of other projects being de…

M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 484/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

…earch, however, the said seized document pointed that the assessee had been making construction expenditure outside the books of accounts. The guess-work could be resorted to as per the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (390 ITR 496). In the case of Chetan Das Lachman Das (254 CTR 392), it was held that seized material could be relied upon to draw inference that there could be similar transactions. Therefore, findings in respect of unaccounted expenditure incurred outside the books of account for some financial year could be extrapolated in respect of other projects being de…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. GAURAV DALMIA, DELHI

In the result, additional ground 1 under Rule 27 of the assessee is

ITA 4162/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…ax, (Central) III Vs Kabul Chawla ITA no 707/2014, (Delhi High Court) reported in 380 ITR 573. c) CIT Vs Singhad Technical Education Society (SC) 397 ITR 344 d) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central-2, New Delhi v. Meeta Gutgutia (Delhi HC) reported in 395 ITR 526. Page 11 of 30 ITA No.4162/DEL/2025 [A.Y 2016-17] The Dy. C.I.T. Vs. Gaurav Dalmia 2.5 The aforesaid judgments have also been noted by learned CIT (A) at pages 60 and 61 of his order, further, even the fact that the entries so mentioned in the alleged seized document are recorded in the books of accounts of various entities of Dalmia groups have…

SHAMKANT KESHAV KOTKAR (PROP. NANDAN BUILDERS),PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1358/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 26Section 263Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”बी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFOREDR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.1358/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shamkant Keshav Kotkar V PCIT(Central), Pune. (Prop. Nandan Builders), s. Flat No.1, Nandadeep Apartment, Prabhar Road, Erandwana, Pune – 411004. PAN: ABEPK3581D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Kishor B Phadke Revenue by Shri Amit Bobde,IRS–Commissioner of Income tax(DR) Date of hearing 18/11/2025 Date of pronouncement 31/12/20…

M/S. BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. PCIT, CC-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1379/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…vision proceedings without considering the decision of CIT(A) based on the examination on the same ground viz. 11(4A) is not tenable in the eyes of law. 7. The assessee trust also relied on the following judicial decisions: i) Pr.CIT v Meeta Gulgutia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 287/248 Taxman 384 (Delhi) ITA Nos.1378 & 1379/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s.Bannari Amman Educational Trust :: 5 :: ii) Hon'ble ITAT decision in the case of M/s. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. v. PCIT [3202/Mum/2018] 4. The Ld.PCIT is noted to have ignored the assertion of the assessee that (i) ₹14,50,92,622/- was incidental income…

BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. PCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1378/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…vision proceedings without considering the decision of CIT(A) based on the examination on the same ground viz. 11(4A) is not tenable in the eyes of law. 7. The assessee trust also relied on the following judicial decisions: i) Pr.CIT v Meeta Gulgutia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 287/248 Taxman 384 (Delhi) ITA Nos.1378 & 1379/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s.Bannari Amman Educational Trust :: 5 :: ii) Hon'ble ITAT decision in the case of M/s. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. v. PCIT [3202/Mum/2018] 4. The Ld.PCIT is noted to have ignored the assertion of the assessee that (i) ₹14,50,92,622/- was incidental income…

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1801/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…reproduced below: 3. The following case laws are relied upon where in it has been held that a search assessment has to be framed only on the basis of materials impounded. Legal decision relied upon: a) PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop: M/s Ferns "N" Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) b) PCIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) c) CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation Ltd., 374 ITR 645 (Bombay) d) CIT VS SKS Ispat and Power Ltd 398 ITR 584 (Bombay) e) CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 (Bombay) f) PCIT Vs Dipak Jashvnathlapunchal 397 ITR 153 (Gujarat) g) Decision of Gujarat HC in the case of Saumya Constructio…

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1535/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…reproduced below: 3. The following case laws are relied upon where in it has been held that a search assessment has to be framed only on the basis of materials impounded. Legal decision relied upon: a) PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop: M/s Ferns "N" Petals (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) b) PCIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) c) CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation Ltd., 374 ITR 645 (Bombay) d) CIT VS SKS Ispat and Power Ltd 398 ITR 584 (Bombay) e) CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 (Bombay) f) PCIT Vs Dipak Jashvnathlapunchal 397 ITR 153 (Gujarat) g) Decision of Gujarat HC in the case of Saumya Constructio…

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1620/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1619/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Showing 1–20 of 1,215 · Page 1 of 61

...