How many judgments cite Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT?

64 judgments on BharatTax cite Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT (193 ITR 669), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 68, Section 115BBE, Section 143(3), Section 234A, Section 234B.

Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT

193 ITR 669High Court1992#1777 most cited

What is Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT authority for?

Best judgment assessments under Section 144 must be a fair and rational estimation of income by the Assessing Officer, not capricious or arbitrary. Appellate authorities should accept clarificatory evidence to test the fairness of such assessments, even if produced for the first time.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills · 193 ITR 669 · Section 144 Income Tax Act · best judgment assessment · arbitrary assessment · capricious assessment · fair estimation of income · clarificatory evidence · additional evidence CIT(A) · appellate authority powers · fairness of assessment · rational estimation

Also reported as

59 Taxmann 405

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 68 Section 115BBE Section 143(3)Section 234A Section 234B Section 46A Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 13(l)(d)section 23(3)section 147(1)section 164(2)section 10(33)section 13(1)(d)shell company section 250(4)section 13(2)source of source bogus share capital section 80a(5)

Judgments citing Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT

Kailash Chand, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward, Behror

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 565/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dinesh Badgujar, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234A

…he assessee and though arbitrariness cannot be avoided in such estimate, the same must not be capricious but should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case. 2.3.3 In Sri Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v/s CIT (1992) 193 ITR 669 (Kar.): Best judgment assessment ought to be based on a fair and proper estimate of assessee’s income and inferences to be drawn from available material should be properly inferable inferences. 2.3.4 The same principles were propounded by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v/s Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog (2002) 256 ITR 243 (Raj): 3. Howe…

Munir Ahmed Shaikh, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Bharuch

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

ITA 685/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 685/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Munir Ahmed Shaikh Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Maru Street Hansot, Bharuch, 1St Floor Station Road, बनाम Bharuch-393 030 Near Panchwati Chowk, Vs [Pan : Cfwps 1599 M] Bharuch-392 001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…squarely falls within four exceptions as mentioned in Rule- 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. So far as admission of additional evidence is concerned, Ld. AR of the assessee relied upon following case law:  Sri Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills vs. CIT (1982) 193 ITR 669 (Kar)  DCIT vs. New Manas Tea Estate (P.) Ltd. 73 ITD 157 (Gauhati-Trib.)  Smt. Prabhavati S Shah (1998) 231 ITER 1 (Bom)  ITO vs. Bajoria Foundatino (2001) 71 TTJ 343 (Kolkata Trib.) 3. The Ld. AR of the assessee also filed copy of certificate issued by Abheta, Gram Panchayat, Bharuch and one consent letter of Saiyad Mehboobali Gulamnabi. 4.…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Ballari vs. Sha Ganeshmal Jewarraj Bohra, Koppal

In the result, both the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1202/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar E., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115BSection 131Section 148Section 68

…as additional evidence. ITA No.1202 & CO 30/Bang/2024 Page 15 of 20 The Courts have held that the materials of clarificatory nature are not additional evidence. This issue arose before the Karnataka High Court in Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 669/[1991] 59 Taxman 405. The issue before the Court, in brief, was that the ITO framed the best judgment assessment under section 144 relying upon the material from the Commercial Tax Department relating to the turnover of the assessee. Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee produced S.T. assessment order for the first time and refused to l…

Shreeji Developers, Vadodara, Gujarat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1526/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1526/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shreeji Developers The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Nishad Residency Ward-3(1)(2) V/S. Flat -5, 3Rd Floor Vadodara 19, Vinayak Society Near Natubhai Circle, Gotri Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Adbfs 9273 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Karan Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Karan Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69C

…tamp duty. The Departmental Representative did not object to admission of additional evidence. 6. After considering the submissions of both parties and the judicial precedents cited by the assessee (including Sri Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 669 [Karnataka High Court] and Braganza Shreeji Developers vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 5 Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 116 taxmann.com 11 [Bombay High Court], we are of the view that the additional evidence submitted by the assessee is clarificatory in nature and goes to the root of the matter. The evidence has a direct bearing on the exp…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kottayam vs. Sunitha Menon, Kottayam

Appeal is allowed

ITA 114/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: --- None---For Respondent: Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

…allowed. The argument of the appellant is technically correct as provisions u/s. 145(3) of rejecting the books of account have not been specifically invoked in assessment order. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills Vs.CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar.) has observed that "In the absence of any prejudice to the revenue, and the basis of the tax under the Act being to levy tax, as far as possible, on the real income, the approach should be liberal in applying the procedural provisions of the Act. An appeal is but a continuation of the original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer coul…

Priyanka Surana, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 102/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

…directly concerned with the collection of tax on sales and hence, the with correctness thereof. The sales, having accepted by them, there was no reason to make a further enhancement in the declared sales Kindly refer Shree Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills v. CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar). More particularly, when no evidence of suppression of sale is found nor alleged so. 11.1 We have already stated that that the cash in hand is supported with the cash book, sales book, purchase book, inventory register and ledgers which are duly maintained during the course of day to day business transaction, which also duly audited by the…

Mallanagouda Ninganagouda Patil, Bilagi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bagalkot

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

ITA 430/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Mudnur, CA

Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

…. CIT(A) erred in invoking the provisions of rule 46A even when the assessment completed was u/s 144 though stated as 143(3) thereby ignoring evidence and explanation submitted. In Karnataka High Court case of Sri Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 669 wherein it is held that "The appellate authority should have accepted the material produced by the assessee as clarificatoty in nature and considered the same to test the fairness and propriety of the estimate of income made by the Income-tax Officer. Though it was belated production of very relevant material, no prejudice (in its legal sense) wo…

Lokesh Ghiya, Nagda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ujjain

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 504/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanilokesh Ghiya Ito 27, Government Colony Nagda Ujjain Vs. M.P. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aoipg2695D Assessee By Shri Amit Choudhary Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.04.2024

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…[2015] 60 taxmann.com 351 (Calcutta) (iii) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd vs CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC), (iv) State of Kerala Vs. C. Velukutty [1966] 60 ITR 239 (SC) (v) V.B. Gadkari Vs. ITO (1985) 59 STC 362, 364 (M.P.) vi) Shankar Khadsari Sugar Mills Vs. CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar.) 1992 ( 3. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the assessee has not filed any return of income u/s 139 of the Act nor in response to notice issued by the AO u/s 148 of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the assessee can not be accepted that deposit made in the bank account representing the business turnover when the assessee ha…

Balaji Jewellers, Jaipur vs. ACIT CC -4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT

Section 115BSection 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 68

…directly concerned with the collection of tax on sales and hence, the with correctness thereof. The sales, having accepted by them, there was no reason to make a further enhancement in the declared salesKindly refer Shree Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills v. CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar). More particularly, when no evidence of suppression of sale is found nor alleged so. 6.4 We furthersubmit, that the cash in hand is supported with the cash book, sales book, purchase book, inventory register and ledgers which are duly maintained during the course of day to day business transaction, which also duly audited by the qualified c…

Rukmani Jewellers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cir.-4 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 539/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) a

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR MkWa- ,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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 539/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Rukmani Jewellers Private DCIT, Limited, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Vs. Circle-04, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAECR 6786 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.), Shri S. L. Jain (Adv.)…

DCIT, Ahmedabad vs. Shri Vinodchandra Shanabhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed subject to the direction

ITA 1597/AHD/2017[A.Y- 2012-13,]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1597/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Shri Vinodchandra Shanabhai Patel, Circle-3(2), Vs. 28, Nirant Park, Ahmedabad. Opp. Sun & Step Club Road, Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad-380061. Pan: Afepp6977J

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Satish Solanki Sr. D.R

Section 133A

…on the reason that returned income is less than the income disclosed at the time of survey, which cannot be the reason for making huge addition without corroborating evidences. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills Vs. CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar.) has observed that "In the absence of any prejudice to the revenue, and the basis of the tax under the Act being to levy tax, as far as possible, on the real income, the approach should be liberal in applying the procedural provisions of the Act. An appeal is but a 'nuation of the original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer, could h…

Raj Auto Wheels (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Ajmer

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

ITA 929/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…ttention to this vital facts going to the root of the issue and therefore, Income Tax Authorities could not have made any addition on this account as was held by the Hon`ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shree Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills v. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 669 (Cal) (DPB 9-11),it was held that. “Income is estimated on the basis of the assessee's turnover furnished by the CTO. Income of the assessee is only from the sale of sugar; there can be no dispute on this. Therefore, the ‘turnover' which is the basis for estimating the income, shall be proximate or relatable, to the turnover of sugar. If on the f…

M/S Raj Auto Wheels P .Ltd., Ajmer vs. JCIT, Range-1, Ajmer

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

ITA 397/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR

Section 131Section 145(3)Section 194ASection 40

…ttention to this vital facts going to the root of the issue and therefore, Income Tax Authorities could not have made any addition on this account as was held by the Hon`ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shree Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills v. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 669 (Cal) (DPB 9-11),it was held that. “Income is estimated on the basis of the assessee's turnover furnished by the CTO. Income of the assessee is only from the sale of sugar; 25 ITA NO. 397/JP/2015 RAJ AUTO WHEELS (P) LTD. VS JCIT, RANGE-1, AJMER there can be no dispute on this. Therefore, the ‘turnover' which is the basis for estimating the inco…

Dy.CIT (E) -2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Educational Trust, Mumbai

ITA 1831/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh DharapFor Respondent: Ms. Achal Sharma CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(33)Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM ITA No. 1828 to 1831/MUM/2022 (Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2011-12) Mumbai Education Trust DY.CIT (E)-2(1) Room No. 608, 6th Floor, MTNL General Arun Kumar Vaidya Chowk, Bandra Reclamation, Exchange Bldg, Cumballa Hill, Vs. Pedder Rd, Mumbai-400 026 Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAATM0985G Assessee by : Sh. Rajesh Dharap, Revenue by : Ms. Achal Sharma CIT DR Date of hearing: 22.09.2022 Date of pronouncement : 30.09.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH :- 01. These are four a…

Dy.CIT (E) -2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Educational Trust, Mumbai

ITA 1830/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh DharapFor Respondent: Ms. Achal Sharma CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(33)Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Dy.CIT (E) -2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Educational Trust, Mumbai

ITA 1829/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh DharapFor Respondent: Ms. Achal Sharma CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(33)Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Dy.CIT (E) -2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Educational Trust, Mumbai

ITA 1828/MUM/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh DharapFor Respondent: Ms. Achal Sharma CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(33)Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

DCIT Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Alpeshkumar C.Patel, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 41(1)Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ C’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1908/AHD/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive in Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. PAN: AEAPP9489G And आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1991/AHD/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T., Alpeshkumar C. Patel, Circle-2(1)(2), Vs. 503, Milestone Building, Ahmedabad. Drive in Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. PAN: AEAPP9…

The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Mohammedarif Ibrahimbhai Shaikh, Ahmedabad

ITA 962/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR &For Respondent: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 147

…unt involved as per ration laid down in following cases: CIT vs. Samir Synthetics Mill [2010] 326 ITR 410 (Guj.) CIT Vs. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. - (2013) 40 Taxmann 494(Guj) Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shankar Khandsari Sugar Mills Vs. CIT 193 ITR 669 (Kar.) has observed that "In the absence of any prejudice to the revenue, and the basis of the tax under the Act being to levy tax, as far as possible, on the real income, the approach should be liberal in applying the procedural provisions of the Act. An appeal is but a continuation of the original proceeding and what the Income-tax Officer coul…

The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Mohammedarif Ibrahimbhai Shaikh, Ahmedabad

ITA 1115/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR &For Respondent: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 147