S.R. Koshti v. CIT

276 ITR 165High Court2005#411 most cited

What is S.R. Koshti v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer is duty-bound to grant relief to an assessee wherever it is due, even if such relief has not been specifically claimed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings.

217

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S.R. Koshti v. CIT · AO duty to grant relief · relief not claimed by assessee · suo motu relief · Assessing Officer obligation · assessment procedure · unaccounted income expenses · section 143(3) · section 153A · section 147 · Gujarat High Court

Also reported as

146 Taxmann 335

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 131(1A)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158basection 150unexplained jewellerysection 70beyond four yearssection 18statement under section 132(4)section 149(1)(b)

Judgments citing S.R. Koshti v. CIT

SHRI KAMLESH VASHRAMBHAI RAMANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, (in ITA No

ITA 65/RJT/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.451/Rjt/2013 (Assessment Years: (2008-2009) Shri Vashrambhai Ghelabhai Ramani, Vs. The Dcit, 22, Ranchodnagar Society, Kuvadava Central Circle-2, Road, Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bflpr5056N आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.65/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Years: (2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 63/Rjt/2014 &407/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) Shri Kamlesh Vashrambhai Ramani, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Prop. Marutinandan Petroleum, 22, Vs. Central Circle-2, Ranchodnagar Society,Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahqpr2043D

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…the disclosure of unaccounted income. In fact, even if an assessee inadvertently failed to claim any legitimate claim, the revenue has to correct it and due tax has to be collected. In this regard Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT 276 ITR 165 (Guj) has held that "the authorities under I.T. Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee under a mistake, misconception or not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and assure that only legitim…

SHRI KAMLESH VASHRAMBHAI RAMANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, (in ITA No

ITA 63/RJT/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.451/Rjt/2013 (Assessment Years: (2008-2009) Shri Vashrambhai Ghelabhai Ramani, Vs. The Dcit, 22, Ranchodnagar Society, Kuvadava Central Circle-2, Road, Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bflpr5056N आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.65/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Years: (2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 63/Rjt/2014 &407/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) Shri Kamlesh Vashrambhai Ramani, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Prop. Marutinandan Petroleum, 22, Vs. Central Circle-2, Ranchodnagar Society,Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahqpr2043D

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…the disclosure of unaccounted income. In fact, even if an assessee inadvertently failed to claim any legitimate claim, the revenue has to correct it and due tax has to be collected. In this regard Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT 276 ITR 165 (Guj) has held that "the authorities under I.T. Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee under a mistake, misconception or not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and assure that only legitim…

KAMLESH VASHRAMBHAI RAMANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, (in ITA No

ITA 407/RJT/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.451/Rjt/2013 (Assessment Years: (2008-2009) Shri Vashrambhai Ghelabhai Ramani, Vs. The Dcit, 22, Ranchodnagar Society, Kuvadava Central Circle-2, Road, Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bflpr5056N आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.65/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Years: (2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 63/Rjt/2014 &407/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) Shri Kamlesh Vashrambhai Ramani, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Prop. Marutinandan Petroleum, 22, Vs. Central Circle-2, Ranchodnagar Society,Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahqpr2043D

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…the disclosure of unaccounted income. In fact, even if an assessee inadvertently failed to claim any legitimate claim, the revenue has to correct it and due tax has to be collected. In this regard Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT 276 ITR 165 (Guj) has held that "the authorities under I.T. Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee under a mistake, misconception or not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and assure that only legitim…

SHRI VASHRAMBHAI GHELABHAI RAMANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , CEN.CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, (in ITA No

ITA 451/RJT/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.451/Rjt/2013 (Assessment Years: (2008-2009) Shri Vashrambhai Ghelabhai Ramani, Vs. The Dcit, 22, Ranchodnagar Society, Kuvadava Central Circle-2, Road, Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bflpr5056N आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.65/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Years: (2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 63/Rjt/2014 &407/Rjt/2014 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) Shri Kamlesh Vashrambhai Ramani, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Prop. Marutinandan Petroleum, 22, Vs. Central Circle-2, Ranchodnagar Society,Rajkot. Rajkot. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahqpr2043D

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…the disclosure of unaccounted income. In fact, even if an assessee inadvertently failed to claim any legitimate claim, the revenue has to correct it and due tax has to be collected. In this regard Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti vs. CIT 276 ITR 165 (Guj) has held that "the authorities under I.T. Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee under a mistake, misconception or not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and assure that only legitim…

ZAFAR IQBAL,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

ITA 1170/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 54F

…en held that if the capital gain has been wrongly offered in return, no tax should be levied as tax cannot be collected except by authority of law as per Article 265 of the Constitution of India. And it has been held in the case of S. R. Kosthi vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj) that regardless of whether the revised return filed or not, once the assessee is in a position to show that the assessee has been over assessed, regardless of whether the over assessment is as a result of assesse's mistake or otherwise, the CIT has the power to correct such an assessment. Your Honors, the Ld. AO had not allowed any deductio…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BENGALURU vs. MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1297/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri H.N Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1027-1028-1296-1297/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14,2017-18,2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Mathikere Ramaiah Central Circle - 2(1), Seetharam, Bengaluru. No.9, Gokula House, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Mathikere, Bengaluru. . PAN – AGOPS 5886 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.9, Gokula House, Income Tax, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Central Circle - 2(1), Mathikere, Beng…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BENGALURU vs. MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1296/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri H.N Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1027-1028-1296-1297/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14,2017-18,2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Mathikere Ramaiah Central Circle - 2(1), Seetharam, Bengaluru. No.9, Gokula House, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Mathikere, Bengaluru. . PAN – AGOPS 5886 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.9, Gokula House, Income Tax, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Central Circle - 2(1), Mathikere, Beng…

MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM,MATHIKERE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1286/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri H.N Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1027-1028-1296-1297/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14,2017-18,2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Mathikere Ramaiah Central Circle - 2(1), Seetharam, Bengaluru. No.9, Gokula House, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Mathikere, Bengaluru. . PAN – AGOPS 5886 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.9, Gokula House, Income Tax, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Central Circle - 2(1), Mathikere, Beng…

DCIT, CC-2(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1028/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri H.N Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1027-1028-1296-1297/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14,2017-18,2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Mathikere Ramaiah Central Circle - 2(1), Seetharam, Bengaluru. No.9, Gokula House, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Mathikere, Bengaluru. . PAN – AGOPS 5886 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.9, Gokula House, Income Tax, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Central Circle - 2(1), Mathikere, Beng…

DCIT, CC- 2(1), BLR, BENGALURU vs. MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1027/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri H.N Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1027-1028-1296-1297/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14,2017-18,2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Mathikere Ramaiah Central Circle - 2(1), Seetharam, Bengaluru. No.9, Gokula House, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Mathikere, Bengaluru. . PAN – AGOPS 5886 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.9, Gokula House, Income Tax, MS Ramaiah Main Road, Central Circle - 2(1), Mathikere, Beng…

JCIT(OSD), CC-1, LKO, LUCKNOW vs. ACP TOLLWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the Cross\nObjection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 131/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(2)Section 32

…the authorities under the Act\nare required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes dues are\ncollected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied\nupon the various decisions e.g. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 193 CTR (Guj) 518\n: (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf vs. ITO (1970) 77 ITR 237\n(Ker.), CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. (1971) 81 ITR 303\n(Del), CIT vs. Archana R. Dhanwatey (1981) 24 CTR (Bom) 142: (1982)\n136 ITR 355 (Bom)\n12. Thus, the Tribunal at Pune has not only considered the decision of\nthe Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Northern Karnataka\nExpr…

SURYA SINGHAL,KOTA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 928/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

…e proof of fact and can always be explained.\nIt may be mentioned that person cannot be charged even a paisa more\nthan what is due.\nSimilar finding was also given in the flowing cases: -\ni) In the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-\n(2005) 276 ITR 165, it has been held by Gujarat High Court as\nunder:\n\"A word of caution. The authorities under the Act are under an\nobligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected\nonly as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake,\nmisconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-\nassessed, the authorities under the Act…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP ORGANISERS PVT LTD , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

ITA 482/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…T (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 6.3. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are relating to the business of the…

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP VENTURE LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

ITA 481/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…T (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 6.3. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are relating to the business of the…

SANKALP VENTURE LLP,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

ITA 436/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…T (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 6.3. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are relating to the business of the…

SANKALP ORGANISERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

ITA 435/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…T (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 6.3. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are relating to the business of the…

ROBIN RAMAVTAR GOENKA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

ITA 434/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69C

…T (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 7.3. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are I.T.(SS)A No. 46/Ahd/2023 and O…

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT SIRMAUR,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS) , CHANDIGARH

In the result, Assessee's appeal for A

ITA 1122/CHANDI/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: The Cit(Exemptions) Have Not Been Considered Properly. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or Amend The Grounds Of Appeal Before The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Deposed Off."

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)
Section 10

…a, reported in 43 CTR 229 and besides that for the said preposition, the assessee relied upon other case laws like ; (i) National Contracting Company Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT, ITAT Chennai, ITA No. 455/Chny/2024. (ii) SR Koshti vs CIT, Gujarat High Court reported in 276 ITR 165. 11. The Ld. Counsel also relied upon the judgment of Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT that even if there is mistake by the assessee for claiming the legitimate exemption/deduction, the Income Tax Authority is duty bound to consider such legitimate claim and give it under the proper and legitimate section to the assessee, even if it is claimed under…

SANKALP IN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result Revenue’s Ground Nos

ITA 577/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 69C

…(1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled principle of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee wherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti -Vs- CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj). 6.4. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology adopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for arbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized materials contain noting of ‘unaccounted receipts’ and ‘unaccounted payments’. Such receipts as well as payments are relating to the business of the…

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP IN, AHMEDABAD

In the result Revenue's Ground Nos

ITA 568/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, Judicial Member\nAnd\nShri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 69C

…97) 225 ITR 746 (SC). Further it is well settled\nprinciple of law that AO is duty bound to give relief to an assessee\nwherever due, even if it has not been claimed by the assessee.\nReliance is placed on decision in the case of S. R. Koshti -Vs- CIT\n(2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj).\n6. 4. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that the methodology\nadopted by Ld CIT(A) is not absolutely scientific and leaves room for\narbitrariness. It is further submitted that the very same seized\nmaterials contain noting of 'unaccounted receipts' and\n'unaccounted payments'. Such receipts as well as payments are\nrelating to the business…

Showing 1–20 of 217 · Page 1 of 11

...
S.R. Koshti v. CIT (276 ITR 165) — Cited in 217 Judgments | BharatTax