Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. v. CIT

62 ITR 528High Court1966#4221 most cited

What is Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. v. CIT authority for?

Where an Assessing Officer rejects an assessee's accounts and estimates income to their detriment, the assessee is entitled to know the basis of the estimation and an opportunity to rebut it.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Yaggina Veeraraghavulu · Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. v. CIT · 62 ITR 528 · section 145(3) · estimation of income · opportunity to rebut · principles of natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 44AD

Issues it is cited on

section 2(15a)section 17(2)(iiia)illegal paymentretention moneysection 17(2)depreciation on goodwillsection 80ia(4)section 254(2)deduction u/s 80iarule of consistencysection 17section 292c

Judgments citing Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. v. CIT

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. M/S R.R.Energy Ltd., Raigarh(C.G)

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are allowed and cross objections filed for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and...

ITA 227/BIL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jan 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CITDR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…nearthed during operation u/s 132. If any defect in the system and record exists then the A.O. must record a clear finding as held in CITvs Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. vs CIT 62 ITR 528, it was held that assessee is entitled to know the basis for estimation of Turnover and Gross profit. In Seth Nathuram Murmalai 25 ITR 216 (Nagpur), it has been held that ITO must disclose the basis of computation of order and make his order a speaking order to make higher percentage. The "Estimations must not be arbitrary, vague and fanciful, but…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. M/S R.R.Energy Ltd., Raigarh(C.G)

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are allowed and cross objections filed for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and...

ITA 226/BIL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jan 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CITDR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…nearthed during operation u/s 132. If any defect in the system and record exists then the A.O. must record a clear finding as held in CITvs Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. vs CIT 62 ITR 528, it was held that assessee is entitled to know the basis for estimation of Turnover and Gross profit. In Seth Nathuram Murmalai 25 ITR 216 (Nagpur), it has been held that ITO must disclose the basis of computation of order and make his order a speaking order to make higher percentage. The "Estimations must not be arbitrary, vague and fanciful, but…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. M/S R.R.Energy Ltd., Raigarh(C.G)

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are allowed and cross objections filed for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and...

ITA 225/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jan 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CITDR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…nearthed during operation u/s 132. If any defect in the system and record exists then the A.O. must record a clear finding as held in CITvs Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 442 (AP). In Yaggina Veera Ragha Vulu and Mavuleti Somaraju & Co. vs CIT 62 ITR 528, it was held that assessee is entitled to know the basis for estimation of Turnover and Gross profit. In Seth Nathuram Murmalai 25 ITR 216 (Nagpur), it has been held that ITO must disclose the basis of computation of order and make his order a speaking order to make higher percentage. The "Estimations must not be arbitrary, vague and fanciful, but…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S Arihant Pulication (India) Ltd., Meerut

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5405/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 145(3)

…ortunity to rebut the same. Estimates framed without giving the basis for their fixation and without furnishing to the assessee the material on which the rate of gross profit is arrived at or without giving an opportunity to the assessee to rebut it, are bad (62 ITR 528, 26 ITR 775, 12 ITR 393, 19 ITR 102 and 25 ITR 216). 2.8 In light of the above principles, the AO was completely unjustified in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee and estimating the gross profit at the rate of 35% of the turnover. Firstly, the system of maintaining inventory on the basis of periodical stock inspection rather than on t…

M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 474/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…ioner of Income- Tax, Bombay City 11. 5. The appellant should have been provided with an opportunity to rebut before rejecting the books of accounts and estimating the profits.64 ITR 175 (AP) S. Sarabhaiah Setty and Sons. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax, A.P & 62 ITR 528 (AP) Yakub Versey Laljee & Another V. Commissioner of Income-Tax, A. P 6. Estimate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770(SC) Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (S…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 4366/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…ioner of Income- Tax, Bombay City 11. 5. The appellant should have been provided with an opportunity to rebut before rejecting the books of accounts and estimating the profits.64 ITR 175 (AP) S. Sarabhaiah Setty and Sons. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax, A.P & 62 ITR 528 (AP) Yakub Versey Laljee & Another V. Commissioner of Income-Tax, A. P 6. Estimate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770(SC) Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (S…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 2561/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…ioner of Income- Tax, Bombay City 11. 5. The appellant should have been provided with an opportunity to rebut before rejecting the books of accounts and estimating the profits.64 ITR 175 (AP) S. Sarabhaiah Setty and Sons. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax, A.P & 62 ITR 528 (AP) Yakub Versey Laljee & Another V. Commissioner of Income-Tax, A. P 6. Estimate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770(SC) Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (S…

M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 3967/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…ioner of Income- Tax, Bombay City 11. 5. The appellant should have been provided with an opportunity to rebut before rejecting the books of accounts and estimating the profits.64 ITR 175 (AP) S. Sarabhaiah Setty and Sons. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax, A.P & 62 ITR 528 (AP) Yakub Versey Laljee & Another V. Commissioner of Income-Tax, A. P 6. Estimate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770(SC) Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (S…