Rama Traders v. First ITO

25 ITD 599Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1998#6017 most cited

What is Rama Traders v. First ITO authority for?

No addition can be made based on a presumption under section 132(4A) using figures from another firm's books without corroborative evidence. Presumptions regarding the correctness of documents cannot be raised against a third party without such evidence.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Rama Traders v. First ITO · section 132(4A) · presumption · corroborative evidence · third party · loose papers · seized documents · section 292C

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 292CSection 115BBESection 132(4A)Section 69CSection 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 142(2)section 132(4a)section 153c(1)violation of natural justicedumb documentssection 34section 292con-moneysection 90documents seizedsection 292loose papers

Judgments citing Rama Traders v. First ITO

DCIT, Central Circle 1, Rajkot vs. Shri Deepak Mohanlal Purswani, Rajkot

ITA 665/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.630 & 631/Rjt/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: (2021-2022 & 2022-23) Hybrid Hearing Shree Deepak Mohanlal Puruswani बनाम The Dcit, Cc-1 Rajkot Nr. Maa Krupa, 4- Saurashtra Kala Vs. Aaykar Bhawan "Amruta Estate", Kendra Society, Opp. Nirmala Convent, Mg Road, Rajkot 360001, Kalawad Road, Rajkot-360001 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) स्थायीलेखासं/. जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Ajvpp5139P (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/. Ita No.665/Rjt/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: (2022-23) The Dcit, Cc-1 Rajkot बनाम Shree Deepak Mohanlal Puruswani Aaykar Bhawan“Amruta Estate", 2Nd Vs. Nr. Maa Krupa, 4- Saurashtra Kala Floor Mg Road Kendra Society, Opp. Nirmala Rajkot 360001, Gujrat Convent, Kalawad Road, (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) स्थायीलेखासं/. जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Ajvpp5139P Rajkot-360001 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारितीकीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राजस्वकीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13/03/2026 आदेश/Order Per, Bench: Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions: • Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. • Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that - Page 14 o…

Rishi Agarwal, Guwahati vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Guwahati

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 266/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati24 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

…vidence. To the same effect is the decision of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Yash Pal Narendra Kumar (ITA Nos 5340 to 5342/Del/2012 dated 07.02.2013). In the decision, it has also been stated, to quote: "In the case of Rama Traders vs. First ITO (1998) 25 ITD 599 (Pat) [TM] it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee." I.T.A. No.: 266/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Rishi Agarwal. 26. To the same effect is also the dec…

Rishabh Steel Supplier, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 414/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions:  Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee.  Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Additio…

Priyansi Corporation, Dist Rajkot vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for

ITA 408/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

…ll settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions: Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Addition i…

Narendrakumar Bhanwerlal Nimbavat HUF, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 407/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions:  Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee.  Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Additio…

Mahavir Impex, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 406/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions:  Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee.  Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Additio…

Champalal Company, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

ITA 405/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions: • Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. • Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Addition…

Oswal Agricomm Private Limited, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 404/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions:  Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee.  Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Additio…

Oswal Petrochem, Gandhidham vs. DCIT, CC-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for

ITA 402/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions: • Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. • Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Addition…

Shri Ramji Hamir Virda, Gandhidham vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 400/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrids Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Rjt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…settled law that presumptions regarding the correctness of paper, document, data or books of accounts cannot be raised against a third party in the absence of corroborative evidence. Reliance placed on following decisions:  Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM), wherein, it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee.  Jai Kumar Jain vs. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT (Jaipur) (URO), wherein, it was held that – “Additio…

Deputy Commissioner of Inome Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Nama Seetaiah, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 454/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1523/Hyd/2019 & 393/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Nama Seetaiah Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(2) Pan:Aaupn8501F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Shri Nama Seetaiah Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaupn8501F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against, The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Cit (A) 12 Hyderabad Even Dated 22.08.2019

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132

…party, even though the said documents does not belong to the assessee. 9. The assessee has relied upon certain judicial precedents in support of his argument. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Rama Traders reported in 25 ITD 599. Under identical set of facts, the Tribunal has held as under: “Section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -Search and seizure - ITO found certain entries relating to purchases made by assessee in books of another firm R - assessee denied transaction beyond that accounted for in its own books - ITO, however, made additions to assessee's income by…

Nama Seetaiah, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 393/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1523/Hyd/2019 & 393/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Nama Seetaiah Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(2) Pan:Aaupn8501F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Shri Nama Seetaiah Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaupn8501F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against, The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Cit (A) 12 Hyderabad Even Dated 22.08.2019

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132

…party, even though the said documents does not belong to the assessee. 9. The assessee has relied upon certain judicial precedents in support of his argument. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Rama Traders reported in 25 ITD 599. Under identical set of facts, the Tribunal has held as under: “Section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -Search and seizure - ITO found certain entries relating to purchases made by assessee in books of another firm R - assessee denied transaction beyond that accounted for in its own books - ITO, however, made additions to assessee's income by…

Nama Seetaiah, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 1523/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1523/Hyd/2019 & 393/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Nama Seetaiah Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(2) Pan:Aaupn8501F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Shri Nama Seetaiah Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaupn8501F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against, The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Cit (A) 12 Hyderabad Even Dated 22.08.2019

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 132

…party, even though the said documents does not belong to the assessee. 9. The assessee has relied upon certain judicial precedents in support of his argument. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Rama Traders reported in 25 ITD 599. Under identical set of facts, the Tribunal has held as under: “Section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -Search and seizure - ITO found certain entries relating to purchases made by assessee in books of another firm R - assessee denied transaction beyond that accounted for in its own books - ITO, however, made additions to assessee's income by…

ACIT, Udaipur vs. M/S. Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

ITA 295/JODH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. Pan No. Aagca 9897 C

Section 132ASection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. PAN No. AAGCA 9897 C Revenue by Smt. Sanchita Kumar, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri Shrawan Gupta, Adv. Date of Hearing 11/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 15/09/2021 O R D E R PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. Both these appeals have been filed by the revenue against the separate orders passed by the ld. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur dated 18/02/2016 and 05/07/2016 for…

ACIT, Udaipur vs. M/S. Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

ITA 180/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. Pan No. Aagca 9897 C

Section 132ASection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & A.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Ankit Chirag Developers Pvt. Central Circle-1, Ltd., Udaipur. 54-55, Rajdeep, New Fatehpura, Udaipur. PAN No. AAGCA 9897 C Revenue by Smt. Sanchita Kumar, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri Shrawan Gupta, Adv. Date of Hearing 11/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 15/09/2021 O R D E R PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. Both these appeals have been filed by the revenue against the separate orders passed by the ld. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur dated 18/02/2016 and 05/07/2016 for…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…ther person. It is further held that the presumption is rebuttable and not conclusive and it cannot be applied in the absence of corroborative evidence. Straptex India P.Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT [2003] 84 ITR 320 (Mum). In the case of Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM) it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. In Asst. CIT v. Kishore Lal Balwani Rai [2007] 17 SOT 380 (Chd.), it has been held that though the diar…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…ther person. It is further held that the presumption is rebuttable and not conclusive and it cannot be applied in the absence of corroborative evidence. Straptex India P.Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT [2003] 84 ITR 320 (Mum). In the case of Rama Traders vs. First ITO [1998] 25 ITD 599 (Pat.) (TM) it was held that no addition could be made, on the basis of presumption raised by section 132(4A), in the hands of the assessee where in the books of another firm, certain figures were found showing the purchase made by the assessee. In Asst. CIT v. Kishore Lal Balwani Rai [2007] 17 SOT 380 (Chd.), it has been held that though the diar…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3549/DEL/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAPG2585Q Assessee by : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: These three appeals by the department are directed again…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3546/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAPG2585Q Assessee by : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: These three appeals by the department are directed again…

Rama Traders v. First ITO (25 ITD 599) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax