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 367,518 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. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5475/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5425/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5424/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4259/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4258/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4257/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4256/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…lt of search which could be said to be incriminating material, therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material was not tenable. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) " Anurag Dalmia Vs DCIT in ITA No. 5395 & 5396/Del/2017 order dated 15.02.2018 " Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 5522 & 5523/Del/2015 order dated 27.06.2016 " Pr. CIT Vs Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 252 Taxman 407 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gobind Gulati, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5967/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Bhagwani, CA
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 54F

…is found then no addition or disallowance can be made in relation to that Assessment Year in exercise of power u/s.153A. This principle has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia, reported in (2017), 395 ITR 526 and again in the case of 6 I.T.A. No.5967/DEL/2014 Pr.CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 84 taxmann.com 287 (Del.). In view of the binding judicial precedent of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, we hold that no addition can be roped in the assessment made u/s.153A in absence of any incriminating found during the course of…

Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

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

ITA 288/CHANDI/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

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

ITA 287/CHANDI/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

M/S Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1442/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

M/S Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1441/CHANDI/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

M/S Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1440/CHANDI/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

M/S Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1439/CHANDI/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

M/S Krishna Gram Udyog Samiti, Sangrur vs. DCIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1438/CHANDI/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AggarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj
Section 263

…e addition on account of GP and NP. It is further submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to addition on account of GP/NP rate: 1. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/r20171 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/r20171 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/r20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon'ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 2. Kachwala Gems Vs CIT [20071 158 Taxman 71 (SC)/r20071 288 ITR 10 (SC)/r20061 206 CTR 585 (SO (Copy Enclosed) Assessing Officer, on finding that assesse…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 990/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcd1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The D.C.I.T., Vs. M/s DHG Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-II, SCO 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. PAN: AADCD1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DR Respondent by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA & Ms. Kanika Gupta, CA Date of hearing : 02.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 09.05.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M.: The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order passed by learned Commissioner of Income…

M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli Pandit Vs. ACIT (2017) 157 DTR (Mum) (Tri.) 17 x) Pr.CITVs.MeetaGutgutia (2016)395 ITR 526. 55. In view of the aforesaid ratio decidendi of the Hon’ble High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decisions cited above, since assessment for Assessment Year 2009-10 was not pending before the Assessing Officer on the date of search i.e. on 29.05.2012 (first search), no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer without the aid of inc…

M/S. Cliff Trexim Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli Pandit Vs. ACIT (2017) 157 DTR (Mum) (Tri.) 17 x) Pr.CITVs.MeetaGutgutia (2016)395 ITR 526. 55. In view of the aforesaid ratio decidendi of the Hon’ble High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decisions cited above, since assessment for Assessment Year 2009-10 was not pending before the Assessing Officer on the date of search i.e. on 29.05.2012 (first search), no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer without the aid of inc…

M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli Pandit Vs. ACIT (2017) 157 DTR (Mum) (Tri.) 17 x) Pr.CITVs.MeetaGutgutia (2016)395 ITR 526. 55. In view of the aforesaid ratio decidendi of the Hon’ble High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decisions cited above, since assessment for Assessment Year 2009-10 was not pending before the Assessing Officer on the date of search i.e. on 29.05.2012 (first search), no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer without the aid of inc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore vs. Sri Ramappa Chandru, Bangalore

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

ITA 2111/BANG/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri E.S.N. Prasad, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 234B

…4 ITR 654 (Bom) 6) CIT V. SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY reported in 378 ITR 84 (Bom] affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 297 CTR 441 (SC) 7) CIT V. KABUL CHAWLA reported in 380 ITR 573 (Del) 8) MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP. M/s. FERNS "N" PETALS reported in 395 ITR 526 (Del) 9) Ms. LATHA JAIN reported in 384 ITR 543 (Del) 2.1 Without prejudice to the above, the impugned search proceedings in the case of the appellant are bad in law and are ultra-vires the provisions of Section 132[1][a], [b] and [c] of the Act, which have not been contradicted by the authorities below despite having contended before them and th…