R 361 (Pat) (d) Balasubramanian (P.N.) Vs. ITO (1978) 112 ITR 512 (AP) (e) Bagsu Devi Bafna v. CIT

112 ITR 630High Court1978#22029 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing R 361 (Pat) (d) Balasubramanian (P.N.) Vs. ITO (1978) 112 ITR 512 (AP) (e) Bagsu Devi Bafna v. CIT

DCIT, Circle-4, Jaipur vs. M/S Kandoi Metal Powders Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…(b) Namasivayam Chettiar (S.N.) Vs. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 579 (SC) (c) Abdul Razak Vs. CIT (1935) 3 ITR 361 (Pat) (d) Balasubramanian (P.N.) Vs. ITO (1978) 112 ITR 512 (AP) (e) Bagsu Devi Bafna Vs. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 506 (Cal) (f) Cashmir Vastralaya Vs. CIT (1978) 112 ITR 630 (Pat) (v) Munna Lal Murlidhar Vs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All) The principle of natural justice involve a right in the assessee to inspect the reports and obtain the substance of the all relevant documents such as statements, orders, reports etc. so as to be able to lead evidence in rebuttal or to cross examine witness who have given evidence again…

DCIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. Shri Jugal Kishore Garg(Derewala), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 34/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi, CIT- DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)

…(b) Namasivayam Chettiar (S.N.) Vs. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 579 (SC) (c) Abdul Razak Vs. CIT (1935) 3 ITR 361 (Pat) (d) Balasubramanian (P.N.) Vs. ITO (1978) 112 ITR 512 (AP) (e) Bagsu Devi Bafna Vs. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 506 (Cal) (f) Cashmir Vastralaya Vs. CIT (1978) 112 ITR 630 (Pat) 5. Addi tion canno t be made on the basi s of state ment of a th ird p arty: - It is a case where the addition has been made only on the basis of statement of Shri N.K. Gupta Director and key-person of Manglam Group. The assessee further cites the following case laws justifying that the additions cannot be made on the basis of papers seize…

Arindam Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 31, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1543/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M & Dr. A.L. Saini, A.M आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1543/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri I. Banerjee, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)

…heard). It should be noted that the aim of natural justice is to secure justice. The principle of ''audi alteram partem'' only means that the party affected should be given sufficient opportunity to meet the case against him. [Kashmir Vastralaya Vs CIT (Pat) 112 ITR 630]. In the assessee`s case under consideration, no sufficient opportunity was given by ld CIT(A). 5. We note that by taking no notice of the duly presented and acknowledged adjournment application of the assessee, the ld CIT(A) has violated the principle of natural justice and it is a gross negligence of the part of ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) while a…