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.

1,226

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 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)
Read the full judgment

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

M/S. Subhash Stone Industries (P) Ltd., Nainital vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 141/ALLD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad19 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…sessment.’ Similar view has been reiterated by some other High Courts, including, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr.CIT & Ors. vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del). 7.4. As opposed to that, there are certain High Courts, including the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, canvassing a view in favour of the Revenue holding that the scope of assessments u/s 153A, for the years whose assessments already stood completed on the date of search, is not restricted only to the incriminating material found during…

Manish Periwal, Kolkata vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5295/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 153A

…result of search relevant to assessment years under appeals. In support of his contention he has relied upon Judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573 (Del.) and Pr. CIT vs., Meeta Gut Gutia reported in 395 ITR 526 (Del.) in which the Departmental SLP have been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC). He has also referred to panchnama executed in the case of assessee which did not find mention any incriminating material relevant to any assessment years under appeals which could be the basis for making any addition. He has,…

Manish Periwal, Kolkata vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5294/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 153A

…result of search relevant to assessment years under appeals. In support of his contention he has relied upon Judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573 (Del.) and Pr. CIT vs., Meeta Gut Gutia reported in 395 ITR 526 (Del.) in which the Departmental SLP have been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC). He has also referred to panchnama executed in the case of assessee which did not find mention any incriminating material relevant to any assessment years under appeals which could be the basis for making any addition. He has,…

M/S. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2094/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 115JSection 234CSection 801Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 2094/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata (PAN: AAGCS 8492 P) Appellant Respondent I.T.(SS).A. Nos. 42 to 44/Kol/2019 Assessment Years : 2010-11 to 2012-13 M/s Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata (PAN: AAGCS 8492 P) Appellant Respondent I.T.(SS).A. Nos. 54 to 57/Kol/2019 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2016-17 M/s Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata (PAN: AAG…

ACIT, Allahabad vs. M/S Sunsine Infrastate Pvt Ttd, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue in ITA no

ITA 103/ALLD/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad04 May 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sunshine Infraestate Income-Tax, Central Circle, V. Private Limited Allahabad, U.P. 17, Industrial Area, Naini, Allahabad, U.P. Pan: Aancs9247H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.103/Alld/2017) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunshine Infraestate Private Limited The Assistant 17, Industrial Area, Naini, V. Commissioner Of Allahabad, U.P. Income-Tax, Central Circle, Allahabad, U.P. Pan: Aancs9247H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Parveen Godbole,CA
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 250

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 103/Alld/2017 and C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (arising out of ITA No. 103/Alld/2017) Assessment Year 2011-12 Sunshine Infraestate Private Limited,Allahabad IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH “DB”, ALLAHABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT), BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner of Sunshine Infraestate Income-tax, Central Circle, v. Private Limited Allahabad, U.P. 17, Industrial Area, Naini, Allahabad, U.P. PAN: AANCS9247H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (arising out of ITA No.10…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 8284/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 8283/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2411/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2410/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2409/DEL/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2408/DEL/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

K. Narsimha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2407/DEL/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manvendra Goyal, CIT DR &
Section 131Section 153ASection 263

…he addition. The search was conducted on 20.10.2006 and hence the A.Y. 2001-02 cannot be treated as abated assessments. On this issue, reliance is placed on the following case laws:  CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573  Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526  All Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106  ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018,  ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in dated 10.10.2018 etc. ITA Nos. 8283 8284/Del/2019 K. Narsimha 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs…

M/S Anantha Refinery Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

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

ITA 1554/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

…ding. Hence it is case of non-abated assessment years. It has been held by the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd. [2016] 385 ITR 346 and several other decisions of various other High Courts like Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) which have been widely relied on in deciding the proceedings under the Act. It has been ruled by the Courts in the above decisions that unless there is an incriminating material seized at the time of search, completed assessment shall not be disturbed. In this case there is no reference to seized material let alone incriminating material…

M/S Anantha Refinery Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

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

ITA 1553/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

…ding. Hence it is case of non-abated assessment years. It has been held by the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd. [2016] 385 ITR 346 and several other decisions of various other High Courts like Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) which have been widely relied on in deciding the proceedings under the Act. It has been ruled by the Courts in the above decisions that unless there is an incriminating material seized at the time of search, completed assessment shall not be disturbed. In this case there is no reference to seized material let alone incriminating material…

ACIT - 17(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai

ITA 3823/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Singh
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ntities of the assessee, which is sufficient corroboration of the seized material. The Ld. DR has also relied upon several decisions in support of his arguments, they are: - a. CIT v. S.V. Sreenivasan [2018] 404 ITR 433 (Madras) b. Smt Dayawanti v. CIT [2017] 390 ITR 496 (Del.) c. Smt. Vasantibai N. Shah v. CIT [1995] 213 ITR 805 (Bombay). d. Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC) e. S. P. Jaiswal v. CIT [1973] 224 ITR 619 (SC) 14. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that the real issue to be decided in the present case is not as to whether the seized documents are meticulous or complete. The real…

ACIT - 17(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai

ITA 3822/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Singh
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ntities of the assessee, which is sufficient corroboration of the seized material. The Ld. DR has also relied upon several decisions in support of his arguments, they are: - a. CIT v. S.V. Sreenivasan [2018] 404 ITR 433 (Madras) b. Smt Dayawanti v. CIT [2017] 390 ITR 496 (Del.) c. Smt. Vasantibai N. Shah v. CIT [1995] 213 ITR 805 (Bombay). d. Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC) e. S. P. Jaiswal v. CIT [1973] 224 ITR 619 (SC) 14. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that the real issue to be decided in the present case is not as to whether the seized documents are meticulous or complete. The real…

ACIT - 17(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai

ITA 3821/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Singh
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ntities of the assessee, which is sufficient corroboration of the seized material. The Ld. DR has also relied upon several decisions in support of his arguments, they are: - a. CIT v. S.V. Sreenivasan [2018] 404 ITR 433 (Madras) b. Smt Dayawanti v. CIT [2017] 390 ITR 496 (Del.) c. Smt. Vasantibai N. Shah v. CIT [1995] 213 ITR 805 (Bombay). d. Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC) e. S. P. Jaiswal v. CIT [1973] 224 ITR 619 (SC) 14. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that the real issue to be decided in the present case is not as to whether the seized documents are meticulous or complete. The real…

ACIT - 17(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai

ITA 3820/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Singh
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ntities of the assessee, which is sufficient corroboration of the seized material. The Ld. DR has also relied upon several decisions in support of his arguments, they are: - a. CIT v. S.V. Sreenivasan [2018] 404 ITR 433 (Madras) b. Smt Dayawanti v. CIT [2017] 390 ITR 496 (Del.) c. Smt. Vasantibai N. Shah v. CIT [1995] 213 ITR 805 (Bombay). d. Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC) e. S. P. Jaiswal v. CIT [1973] 224 ITR 619 (SC) 14. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that the real issue to be decided in the present case is not as to whether the seized documents are meticulous or complete. The real…

Mr. Krishnakumar Narayanswamy Yelahanka, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(3)(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 582/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm Mr.Krishnakumar Income Tax Officer, Narayanaswamy Yelahanka, Ward-6(3)(3), #959, Vinayaka Nilaya, Bengaluru Vs. Vollalinagara Street, Yelahanka, Bengaluru Pan – Aabpy4989M Appellant Respondent : Shri V.Srinivasan, Adv. Assessee By Revenue By : Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 07-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-04-2022

For Respondent: Shri V.Srinivasan, Adv
Section 133ASection 148Section 234

…by declaring this additional income in his return of income. Hence, the AO made addition of Rs.65.50 Lakhs on this count. The assessee was not able to show any evidence supports his case. Ld.DR relied on the following judgment(s): i. Dayawanti Gupta Vs. CIT [390 ITR 496] (Del) Wherein held that, “where the statement made under oath and were part of record and continued to be so their probative value is un- deniable; Occasion for making them arose because of search and seizure that occurred and seizure of various documents, etc. that pointed out to un-declared income, hence assessee’s argument that they could no…

L.S.Vishnu Prasad, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1688/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 24

…of original assessment. Nothing has been shown to us that the aforesaid decisions have subsequently been reversed or stayed in any manner by higher judicial forum. 9. We find that similar is the view of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287) which has primarily followed the decision of Kabul Chawla (supra). We also find that Special Leave Petition filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The decision of Hon’ble Court was as under: - 1. Delay condoned. 2. We do not find…