R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission

176 ITR 169Supreme Court of India1989#3596 most cited
33

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 1961Section 131

Issues it is cited on

section 23aretention moneysection 145(1)section 211section 115baasection 28(iv)section 145(2)project completion methodsection 43csection 35dpercentage completion methodprincipal officer

Judgments citing R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…R 530 (SC) “Violation of the principle of natural justice may lead to violation of Fundamental rights of equality guaranteed by Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India” c) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1969) 176 ITR 169 (SC) “Order passed in violation of principle of natural justice is void and nullity.” d) Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) “Authorities cannot use the statement without giving an opportunity of cross examination” ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others e) Sona Builders vs Union of India (2001) 251ITR 197-SC In this case, where the assess…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 714/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…R 530 (SC) “Violation of the principle of natural justice may lead to violation of Fundamental rights of equality guaranteed by Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India” c) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1969) 176 ITR 169 (SC) “Order passed in violation of principle of natural justice is void and nullity.” d) Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) “Authorities cannot use the statement without giving an opportunity of cross examination” ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others e) Sona Builders vs Union of India (2001) 251ITR 197-SC In this case, where the assess…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 713/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…R 530 (SC) “Violation of the principle of natural justice may lead to violation of Fundamental rights of equality guaranteed by Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India” c) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1969) 176 ITR 169 (SC) “Order passed in violation of principle of natural justice is void and nullity.” d) Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) “Authorities cannot use the statement without giving an opportunity of cross examination” ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others e) Sona Builders vs Union of India (2001) 251ITR 197-SC In this case, where the assess…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…R 530 (SC) “Violation of the principle of natural justice may lead to violation of Fundamental rights of equality guaranteed by Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India” c) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1969) 176 ITR 169 (SC) “Order passed in violation of principle of natural justice is void and nullity.” d) Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) “Authorities cannot use the statement without giving an opportunity of cross examination” ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others e) Sona Builders vs Union of India (2001) 251ITR 197-SC In this case, where the assess…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 676/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…R 530 (SC) “Violation of the principle of natural justice may lead to violation of Fundamental rights of equality guaranteed by Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution of India” c) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1969) 176 ITR 169 (SC) “Order passed in violation of principle of natural justice is void and nullity.” d) Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) “Authorities cannot use the statement without giving an opportunity of cross examination” ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others e) Sona Builders vs Union of India (2001) 251ITR 197-SC In this case, where the assess…

ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI vs. VNG IMPEX P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5917/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 68

…words. In this Connection, we rely on the decision in Vishnoo V Kamat Tarcar vs. ITO, (1994) 207 ITR 1040 (Bom). The consequence of violation of this principle is that the order is void, as held in Shreeram Durga Prasad (RB) vs. Settlement Commission, (1989) 176 ITR 169 (SC). It is therefore vociferously urged that the order may be declared a nullity and the ground may be allowed. 6.3 Without prejudice to this, it is clear from the bank account that the assessee received back its own money which was advanced to M/s Share India Securities Ltd. The A0 has himself made inquiry from this party u/s 133(6) in connecti…

ANIL DUA,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT -10, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is, thus, allowed

ITA 1843/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Dua Vs. Pcit -10 F-13, Kailash Colony, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110048 Pan :Aacpd8370L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54

…yes of law, illegal and not valid and liable to be quashed. On this ground he has relied upon Page3 the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of R.B. 3 Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatehchand Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission (SC), reported in 176 ITR 169. 7. He further argued that once the notice dated 06.04.2024 under Section 154 of the Act was issued by the AO and the rectification proceeding, since, never withdrawn, and is pending adjudication, the initiation of impugned proceeding under Section 263 of the Act is invalid, pre-mature. On this score alone, the order is liable to be quashed. In t…

VENKATESHWARA WIRES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…administrative decision rendered or an order made in violation of the rule of audi alteram partem is null and viod and the order mas in such a case can be struck down as invalid on that score alone. (c) Shri Ram Durgaprasad Vs. Settlement Commission (1989) 176 ITR 169 (SC) The order made in violation of principal of natural justice is void and nullity (d) CIT v. Panna Devi Saraogi [1970] 78 ITR 728 (Cal.). The opportunity of being heard should be real, reasonable and effective. The same should not be for name sake. It should not be a paper opportunity. (e) Tinbox Company Vs CIT (2001) 249 ITR 216 (SC) The pri…

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. ANKIT UMAKANT AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 4462/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 4462/Mum/2023 (Assessment year : 2011-12) Income-tax Officer, vs Ankit Umakant Agarwal MumbaiRoom No.753, Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051 A-102/103, Raghav Building Vasant Valley, Film City Road Malad East, Mumbai-400 067 PAN: AJXPA6367N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by Shri Vimal Punmiya Respondent by Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR.DR.) Date of hearing Date of pronouncement : 08/07/2024 11/07/2024 ORDER PER ANIKESH BA…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 656/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani (FCA)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 656/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Income Tax Officer, Mukesh Kumar Soni, Vs. Ward-1(2), Jaipur 1524, Sintali Valo Ki Gali Chaura Rasta, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHUPS 6698 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 06/JP/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 656/JP/2023) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Asse…

ITO, WARD- 22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SAIVI FINANCE PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3886/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2015-16 ITO, Ward-22(2) Vs. Saivi Finance Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 249, 10-B, 1st Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, DDA SFS Pocket-A, New Delhi Mayur Vihar, Phase-III, PAN AAACS1226P Delhi – 110 096 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Department by : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/12/2023 Date of 26/02/2024 pronouncement O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order date…

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…/statement etc. will be rendered unreliable and additions made on the basis of such material/statement etc. shall be rendered illegal. Reference in this regard can be made from the decisions made in the following judiciary ruling:-  R.B. ShreeramDurga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC),  KishanChandChellaram Vs. C.I.T. (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)  Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.)  LaxmanBhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22.07.2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). Page No. 66 Udayan Grover 11. Shri Jagdish Purohit was never a DIRECTOR as well as SHARE…

KAILASH CHAND YADAV,100, KALU BABA KI DHANI, SHEOSHINGHPUR, AKODA, PHULERA-303338 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, WARD - 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 82/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

…bunal would not be justified in not setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. (ii) Shreeram Durga Prasad vs. Settlement Commission (1989) 176 ITR 169 (SC) The order made in violation of principle of natural justice is void and a nullity. (iii) A.K. Kraipak vs. UOI AIR 1970 SC 150 The aim of natural justice is to secure justice and to prevent miscarriage of justice. (iv) C. Vasanntlal& Co. vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (v) DhakeshwariCottom Mills Ltd vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) (vi) S.L. Kapoor…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA vs. AASHIKYANA CIVIL CONTRACTORS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9025/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 250(4)Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHIBENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 9025/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. M/s Aashiyana Civil Contractors Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., R/o 302-304, Harsha Corner Noida Complex, Ghazipur, New Delhi-110096 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAECA4833G Assessee by : None Sh. Manoj Kumar, CA (LOA filed) Revenue by : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 16.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 23.03.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by Revenue against…

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 3/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri M.G.Jasnani
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 292

…addition was made, was not supplied. The Ld. AR on this issue relied on the following decisions: i) State of Kerala Vs. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff reported in 1977 (SC-2)- GJX-0054-SC ii) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission, 176 ITR 169 (SC) 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR made reference to the order of Assessing Officer wherein it is mentioned on record that “the assessee was informed about reasons as well as details of the permission given by the JCIT, Range-1, Jalgaon as per letter dated 28.09.2010. The assesee vide his letter dated 11.10.2010 requested for supply of copy of lette…

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 2/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri M.G.Jasnani
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 292

…addition was made, was not supplied. The Ld. AR on this issue relied on the following decisions: i) State of Kerala Vs. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff reported in 1977 (SC-2)- GJX-0054-SC ii) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission, 176 ITR 169 (SC) 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR made reference to the order of Assessing Officer wherein it is mentioned on record that “the assessee was informed about reasons as well as details of the permission given by the JCIT, Range-1, Jalgaon as per letter dated 28.09.2010. The assesee vide his letter dated 11.10.2010 requested for supply of copy of lette…

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri M.G.Jasnani
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 292

…addition was made, was not supplied. The Ld. AR on this issue relied on the following decisions: i) State of Kerala Vs. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff reported in 1977 (SC-2)- GJX-0054-SC ii) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission, 176 ITR 169 (SC) 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR made reference to the order of Assessing Officer wherein it is mentioned on record that “the assessee was informed about reasons as well as details of the permission given by the JCIT, Range-1, Jalgaon as per letter dated 28.09.2010. The assesee vide his letter dated 11.10.2010 requested for supply of copy of lette…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 16 (1), MUMBAI vs. BBC WORLDWIDE MEDIA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 158/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dcit -16(1), Vs. M/S. Bbc World Wide Room No. 439, 4Th Media Pvt Ltd., Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 401, 4Th Floor, Mk Road, Mumbai – Construction House A, 400 020. Off Linking Road, 24Th Road, Khar (West), Mumbai – 400052 Pan/Gir No. : Aadcb2307F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.C T Mathew. DRFor Respondent: Shri.Siddhesh Chougle. AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 41(1)Section 92C

…payment was made to compensate assessee for trading losses, it was revenue in nature - Facts mentioned in order oF Shah Sohonie and Company Vs State of Rajasthan and Others 208 ITR 321(RA] HC); and Shreeram Durga Prasad1R.B.) vs. Settlement Commission 11989] 176 ITR 169 (SC). Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of CIT v. Alchemic (P.) Ltd.: [1981] 130 ITR 168 (Guj), Decision: ITA No. 158 & 2770/Mum/2019 M/s BBC World Wide Media Pvt Ltd., Mumbai I have gone through the AO's order and appellant's submission. The appellant ha relied on the following decisions which are reproduced for clarity of the i…

MAHENDRA H. SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. ITO - WARD- 4 (1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6892/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Bleshri Mahendra H. Shah V. Income Tax Officer – 4(1)(3) 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan C/O. The Presscopper Industries M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 175, Kika Street Mumbai – 400004 Pan: Aafps0929R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Smita Verma
Section 132(4)Section 133(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…statement etc. will be rendered unreliable and additions made on the basis of such material/statement etc. shall be rendered illegal. Reference in this regard can be made from the decisions made in the following judiciary ruling: - • R.B. ShreeramDurga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), • KishanChandChellaram Vs. C.I.T. (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) • Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) 11 Shri Mahendra H. Shah • LaxmanBhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22.07.2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). Further, following legal position/ judicial rulings on the subj…

PLAY GAMES 24 X 7 PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PR. .CIT-(A) 13, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3910/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija
Section 263

…(Hyd. SB); and, 9 Play Games 24x7 Private Limited vi) Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1416) (SC) Further, following case laws have also been referred :- i) R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (176 ITR 169) (SC); ii) Ponkunnam Traders v. Addl. Income Tax Officer (83 ITR 508) (Ker.); iii) Addl. Income Tax Officer v. Ponkunnam Traders (102 ITR 366) (Ker.); iv) Colonisers v. ACIT (41 ITD 57) (Hyd. SB); and, v) Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1416) Thereafter, learned counsel of the assessee has distinguished the following decis…

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2