Shanker Rice Company v. ITO

72 ITD 139Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2000#14428 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Judgments citing Shanker Rice Company v. ITO

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

…of rule 46A, while reaching to such conclusion. 11. Where the Assessing Officer makes estimations, he had to provide evidence and proof as to the falsity of the books of account, etc. where he failed to do so, he should not reject the books of account. iii) 72 ITD 139 (ITAT-Amr) Shankar Rice Co vs. ITO Coming now to another aspect of the arguments of the Id. D.R., namely, the submission that the books of account and records maintained by the assessee were "manufactured". In our opinion, this is a highly irresponsible statement unsupported by any material or evidence. It must be emphasized that the assessee mai…

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S KANDOI METAL POWDERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sample report. The matter was decided on appreciation of evidence. Deletion was held to be valid. (iii) Motipur Sugar Factory (P) Ltd v. CIT (1974)95 ITR 401 (Pat.)(HC)(409)/ Seetarama Mining Co. v. CIT (1968) 68 ITR 1 (AP)(HC)/ Shanker Rice Co. v. ITO (2000) 72 ITD 139 (Asr.)(SB)(Trib.)(158) In above cases, the courts have taken the view that, records maintained by Central Excise Authorities/ Various State Govt authorities are important piece of evidence. Applying the same principle if sales tax authorities have taken the view that the purchases are bogus and if assessee has accepted the same. The order of Sales…

ACIT 17 (3), MUMBAI vs. M/S RASHMI BEARING CO, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 5732/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5732/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-17(3) बिधम/ M/S. Rashmi Bearing Co. Room No.122, 1St Floor, 115, Room No.7, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, G- Block Nagdevi Street, Mumbai- Bkc, Mumbai-400051. 400003. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaefr2683Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Ms. Smita Verma (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Gandhi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/04/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 17.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Justified In Restricting The Addition Made By The Ao To 12.5% Of Bogus Purchases As Against The Addition Made At 17.04% Of The Bogus Purchases, Ignoring That There Was No Compliance To The Notices Issued U/S 133(6) By Ao & The Assessee Was Also Unable To Prove The Genuineness Of The. Purchases Either, By Producing The Suppliers For Examination Or By Furnishing

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh GandhiFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma (Sr. AR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)

…t of Central Excise (a similar law) records maintained were held to be important piece of evidence as held in Motipur Sugal Factory (P) Ltd. V. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 401 (Pat)(HC)(409)(PRO ASSESSE JUDGMENT OTHERWISE ACTUALLY) and in Shanker Rice Co. V. ITO (2000) 72 ITD 139 (Asr.) (SB)(Trib.) (158). By parity of reasoning the same applies to sales tax law as well in context of determination of taxable income in IT Law. 5.16 In the context of the judicial pronouncements rendered on behalf of the appellant, it is a trite law that each judicial decision is rendered in the very peculiar and factual matrix of that case an…

VIJAY B SHAH (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ITO 17 (3)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 667/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharmavijay B Shah (Huf), Vs. I.T.O.-17(3)(5) Prop.- Of M/S Vijay Room No. 137, Aayakar Enterprises, 12A, Giriraj Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, S.T. Road, Mumbai-400020 Carnac Bunder, Mumbai- 400009. Pan/Gir No. Aabhv 7438 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vijay B Shah (HUF), Vs. I.T.O.-17(3)(5) Prop.- of M/s Vijay Room No. 137, Aayakar Enterprises, 12A, Giriraj Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, S.T. Road, Mumbai-400020 Carnac Bunder, Mumbai- 400009. PAN/GIR No. AABHV 7438 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri R.K. Gubgotra (JCIT-DR) Date of Hearing 05/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement 03/03/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28/11/2018 of ld. CIT(A)-28, Mumbai for the A.Y.…

THE ACIT CEN CIR-13, MUMBAI vs. SHRI SURESH V. JAIN, MUMBAI

Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5091/MUM/2007[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5091/Mum/2007 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri L. K. S. DehiyaFor Respondent: ShriRajiv Khandelwal

Section 132(1)Section 153A

…as maintained in respect if each count of yarn, if would not be held that profits could not be deduced horn accounts maintained by assessee. The issue of rejection of books of accounts came up before the Special Bench of ITAT in Shanker Rice Co. V. /TO [2000] 72 ITD 139/110 Taxman 62 (Mag.) (Asr.) (SB). The Special Bench of ITAT held that proviso to section 145(1) is to be applied only on the basis of the positive material and evidence in possession of the department and not on the basis of any surmises and conjectures. Where accounts are audited and proper books of account are maintained proviso to section 145(1…

DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON vs. TULSI EXTRUSIONS LTD.,, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 823/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.556/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 14ASection 40A(3)

…did not match with the manufacturing shown by the assessee, cannot be a reason to infer that the assessee was engaged in carrying out manufacturing activity outside books of account. 16. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in Shanker Rice Company Vs. ITO 2000 72 ITD 139 (Amritsar)(SB) considered almost similar situation in which addition was made by the AO on the presumption of suppressed manufacturing. The Special Bench of the Tribunal reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of account on the ground that such books of account were audited and the statutory registers were maintained which were acce…

TULSI EXTRUSIONS LTD.,,JALGAON vs. JOINT CIT, RANGE-2,, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 556/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.556/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 14ASection 40A(3)