Pr CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia 2017-TIOL-1000-HC-DEL-IT

380 ITR 571High Court2016#383 most cited

What is Pr CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia 2017-TIOL-1000-HC-DEL-IT authority for?

Invocation of Section 153A for assessment is unjustified in years for which no incriminating material was found during a search, particularly when the Supreme Court has dismissed SLPs against such findings.

230

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Meeta Gutgutia · Section 153A · search assessment · incriminating material · reassessment · Section 147 · Section 132 · Supreme Court dismissal · assessment years · unjustified invocation

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 148Section 139(1)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

abatement of assessmentstatutory duessection 158bbstatement under section 132(4)section 153(1)section 65bpaper companysection 245retracted statementsection 153a(1)survey under section 133abeneficial owner

Judgments citing Pr CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia 2017-TIOL-1000-HC-DEL-IT

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 391/RJT/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 390/RJT/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 389/RJT/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 388/RJT/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 715/RJT/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 714/RJT/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 713/RJT/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 712/RJT/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…CITVs. Saumya Construction Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj), (b) Desai Construction P.Ltd., 387 ITR 552 (Guj); and (c) Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). It is also pertinent to take note of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) and CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del). Thus, the issue whether the AO could take cognizance of section 153A in these years or not, is a legal issue which on the basis of interpretation given by the subsequent decisions of various High Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court requires to be taken into considerat…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charanjit Singh Sarna, New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3944/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…dered: • CIT V. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573/[2015l 234 Taxman 300/61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) (para 4). • CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para 4) • Principal CIT v. Kurele Paper Mills (P.) Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) (para 4) • CIT V. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168 (Kar.) (para 4) • CIT V. ST. Francies Clay Decor Tiles [2016] 240 Taxman 168 (Ker.) (para 5) • CIT v. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) (para 5). The Ld. DR also relied upon the following decisions: 1. Dr. A. V. Sreekumar Vs CIT T20181 90 taxmann.com 355 (Kerala) 2. CIT…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charanjit Singh Sarna, New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3943/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…dered: • CIT V. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573/[2015l 234 Taxman 300/61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) (para 4). • CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645 (Bom.) (para 4) • Principal CIT v. Kurele Paper Mills (P.) Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) (para 4) • CIT V. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168 (Kar.) (para 4) • CIT V. ST. Francies Clay Decor Tiles [2016] 240 Taxman 168 (Ker.) (para 5) • CIT v. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) (para 5). The Ld. DR also relied upon the following decisions: 1. Dr. A. V. Sreekumar Vs CIT T20181 90 taxmann.com 355 (Kerala) 2. CIT…

Rohit Jalan, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2205/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…ings) without incriminating material unearthed during search, the share capital received by the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act was deleted by the Tribunal, which order has been upheld by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Kurele Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Del) which decision has not been disturbed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court (2016) 380 ITR (St.) 69-ed and was pleased to dismiss the SLP. 13. Before we part for completeness, we would like to analyze the statement of Shri Narendra Prabhudayal Sureka who according to revenue has given incriminating ocular evidence against the assessee in-respect of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1205/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…of I Tax Act 2010-11 31-08-2010 30-09-2011 2011-12 15-09-2011 30-09-2012 In support of the submissions made herein, the assessee placed reliance on the following judicial precedents: (i) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs Kurele Paper Mills Pvt Ltd [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) has held that where no ITA 1053, 1188 & 1205/JP/2018 & CO 48/JP/2018_ 14 M/s Agrasen Agro Industries P Ltd. Vs DCIT incriminating evidence related to share capital issued was found during the course of search, Assessing officer was not justified in invoking section 68 for the purpose of making additions on account of share capital. (Copy…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1188/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…of I Tax Act 2010-11 31-08-2010 30-09-2011 2011-12 15-09-2011 30-09-2012 In support of the submissions made herein, the assessee placed reliance on the following judicial precedents: (i) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs Kurele Paper Mills Pvt Ltd [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) has held that where no ITA 1053, 1188 & 1205/JP/2018 & CO 48/JP/2018_ 14 M/s Agrasen Agro Industries P Ltd. Vs DCIT incriminating evidence related to share capital issued was found during the course of search, Assessing officer was not justified in invoking section 68 for the purpose of making additions on account of share capital. (Copy…

M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1053/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…of I Tax Act 2010-11 31-08-2010 30-09-2011 2011-12 15-09-2011 30-09-2012 In support of the submissions made herein, the assessee placed reliance on the following judicial precedents: (i) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs Kurele Paper Mills Pvt Ltd [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) has held that where no ITA 1053, 1188 & 1205/JP/2018 & CO 48/JP/2018_ 14 M/s Agrasen Agro Industries P Ltd. Vs DCIT incriminating evidence related to share capital issued was found during the course of search, Assessing officer was not justified in invoking section 68 for the purpose of making additions on account of share capital. (Copy…

Shri Nitinbhai Tulsidas Chottani, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1563/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1562 & 1563/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, AR with Shri Biren ShahFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 153A is required to be determined. Recently, there were jurisprudential developments in this area, and we would like to take into consideration the following decision on the point. i) CIT Vs. Kabul Charwala, 380 ITR 0183 (Del) ii) CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) ITA No.1562 and 1563/Ahd/2017 5 iii) CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del) 9. Thus, it is clear from authoritative pronouncement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court that additions to the income of the assessee in an assessment under section 153A are to be made on the basis of incriminating material foun…

Shri Nitinbhai Tulsidas Chottani, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1562/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1562 & 1563/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, AR with Shri Biren ShahFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 153A is required to be determined. Recently, there were jurisprudential developments in this area, and we would like to take into consideration the following decision on the point. i) CIT Vs. Kabul Charwala, 380 ITR 0183 (Del) ii) CIT Vs. Kurele Papers, 380 ITR 571 (Del) ITA No.1562 and 1563/Ahd/2017 5 iii) CIT Vs. Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del) 9. Thus, it is clear from authoritative pronouncement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court that additions to the income of the assessee in an assessment under section 153A are to be made on the basis of incriminating material foun…

DCIT, CC-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Maan Steel & Power Ltd., Kolkata

In the result this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1192/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey)

Section 132Section 153ASection 250

…ated, the Assessing Officer is required to make reassessment u/s.153A which is only possible when any incriminating material has been found during the course of search.” The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Kurule Paper Mills P. Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) held as follows:- 1. The Revenue has filed the appeal against an order dated 14.11.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in 3761/Del/2011 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2002-03. The question was whether the learned CIT (Appeals) had erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 89 lacs made by the Asse…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1230/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…e of any incriminating material, the same can be reiterated and, therefore, no addition could have been made to the income already assessed. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the following decisions :- 1. Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 07.12.2015. 2. Principal CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 2nd July, 2018. 3. Jai Steel (India) vs. ACIT (2013) 219 Taxman 223 (Raj.) Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that the Ho…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1104/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…e of any incriminating material, the same can be reiterated and, therefore, no addition could have been made to the income already assessed. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the following decisions :- 1. Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 07.12.2015. 2. Principal CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 2nd July, 2018. 3. Jai Steel (India) vs. ACIT (2013) 219 Taxman 223 (Raj.) Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that the Ho…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1103/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…e of any incriminating material, the same can be reiterated and, therefore, no addition could have been made to the income already assessed. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the following decisions :- 1. Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 07.12.2015. 2. Principal CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) SLP filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed vide order dated 2nd July, 2018. 3. Jai Steel (India) vs. ACIT (2013) 219 Taxman 223 (Raj.) Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that the Ho…