Satpal & Sons (HUF) v. ACIT Circle-38(1), New Delhi

166 ITD 616Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#19426 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 151Section 2(22)(e)

Judgments citing Satpal & Sons (HUF) v. ACIT Circle-38(1), New Delhi

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan Extn vs. Om Prakash Arora, Connaught Place

In the result, appeal of the Revenue vide ITA No

ITA 5031/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.42/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5031/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Om Prakash Arora, Assistant Commissioner Of Income M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Tax, Central Circle-01, Bhawan The Variety Books Vs E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Depot. Connaught Place, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…timated addition. Reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Jain Export Pvt. Ltd. 35 taxmann.com 540 as well as other pronouncements covering the subject including of this Tribunal in the case of Satpal and Sons 166 ITD 616, etc. 26. Per Contra, the ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 27. We have heard rival submissions in the light of material placed on record. Section 41(1) of the Act postulates addition in the hands of the assessee qua liabilities which have ceased to exist. In the instant case, it is not the case of the Revenue…

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan Extn vs. Om Prakash Arora, Connaught Place

In the result, appeal of the Revenue vide ITA No

ITA 5029/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.42/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5031/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Om Prakash Arora, Assistant Commissioner Of Income M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Tax, Central Circle-01, Bhawan The Variety Books Vs E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Depot. Connaught Place, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…timated addition. Reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Jain Export Pvt. Ltd. 35 taxmann.com 540 as well as other pronouncements covering the subject including of this Tribunal in the case of Satpal and Sons 166 ITD 616, etc. 26. Per Contra, the ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 27. We have heard rival submissions in the light of material placed on record. Section 41(1) of the Act postulates addition in the hands of the assessee qua liabilities which have ceased to exist. In the instant case, it is not the case of the Revenue…

Dharamtar Motors Services Petroleum Product, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the results, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1438/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1438 & 2534/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S Dharamtar Motor Services Income Tax Officer, Petroleum Product, Vs. Ward 6(1)(4) C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate 903, Ahmedabad. Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aabfd9182F

For Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…to the whole amount of Rs. 2,59,33,030/-. It is strongly stated that in view of the following judgments, sec. 41(1) is not applicable to the facts as narrated herein above. 4. The case law in reference to sec. 41(1) are as under: - • Satpal & Sons Delhi ITAT 166 ITD 616 wherein, following Gujarat high court in Bhogilal Ramjibhai Atara and Ahmedabad ITAT in Ratnamani Metals, has held in para 7 that as per decision of Supreme Court in Sugauli Sugar Works 236 ITR 518 as well as Gujarat High Court and Ahmedabad ITAT even there was outstanding sundry creditors in last three years of balance sheet and no provision was…

Shams Tabrez Gulam Madni Ansari, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(2)(Erstwhile), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1175/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodshamas Tabrez Gulam Madni Ansari, I.T.O. 18(1)(2)(Erstwhile) C/O,D.C. Bothra & Co. (Ca)297, Acit 21(3) (Present),1St Floor, Tardeo Road, 1St Floor Willie Mansion, Piramal Chamber,Lala Baug, Vs. Opp. Bank Of India, Chowk, Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai – 400 007

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 41(1)

…es in the „books of accounts‟ of the assessee, the same thus could not have been held to have ceased under Sec.41(1). Ld. A.R drawing support from the order of the ITAT Delhi Bench “G” in the case of Satpal & Sons (HUF) Vs. ACIT Circle-38(1), New Delhi (2017) 166 ITD 616 (Del) submitted, that even in case the creditors were not found available at the addresses provided and their PAN were also not found to be valid, no addition could be validly made u/s 41(1) on the said standalone basis. Further, the ld. A.R had relied on the order of ITAT „A‟ Bench, Mumbai in the case of ACIT- 17(1), Mumbai Vs. Kokan Mercantile…

Satpal & Sons (HUF) v. ACIT Circle-38(1), New Delhi (166 ITD 616) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax