State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty

60 ITR 239Supreme Court of India1966#1459 most cited

What is State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty authority for?

A best judgment assessment must be based on wisdom, truth, and legal principles, not arbitrary caprice. While it involves estimation and guesswork, this must have a reasonable nexus to available material and the case's circumstances.

78

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

State of Kerala v C. Velukutty · 60 ITR 239 · best judgment assessment · estimation · arbitrary caprice · reasonable nexus · available material · settled principles of justice · guesswork

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 40A(3)Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 144Section 194-IA

Issues it is cited on

section 69dsection 147(1)trade creditorsbogus share capitalsection 80a(5)section 153a(1)(b)best judgment assessmentsanctioning authoritysection 69bmistake apparent from recordrejection of books of accountsection 271f

Judgments citing State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty

ITO, WD-51(4), Kolkata vs. Shri Rabindra Nath Sikdar, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1097/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 28Section 44A

…anding the same. In fact, the ITO should have himself followed the same procedure which the Commissioner (Appeals) did.” In this regard, we also find support & guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala vs. C Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (supra) wherein it was held as under:- “The limits of the power are implicit in the expression "best of his judgment". Judgment is a faculty to decide matters with wisdom truly and legally. Judgment does not depend upon the arbitrary caprice of a judge, but on settled and invariable principles of justice. Though there is an element of guess-work i…

Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-21 vs. M/S Mehta Construction Co

The appeals are partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/314/2016HC Delhi08 Feb 2018

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 145

…770 (SC) Raghubar Mandal harihar Mandal v. the State of Bihar Page 5 of 9 ITA 314/2016 & connected appeals 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the cases 60 ITR 239 (SC) State of Kerala C. Velukutty. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and judicial pronouncements relied upon by the appellant, the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts, by applying section 145(3) of the IT Act and estimating Net Profit @ 3.5% of the Gross Receipts. The addition made by the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 132/BIL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 131/BIL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 130/BIL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 128/BIL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 127/BIL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 126/BIL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…for delivering the judgment was not exercised judiciously and hence his action in this regard, in my considered view, is opposed to the decision in CIT v. Laxminarayan Badridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) and the decision in State of Kerala v. V.C.Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO must not act dishonestly or capriciously because he must exercise his discretion and judgment in the matter judiciously to ensure that the scales of justice were not weighed against the appellant. Reliance for this proposition is placed on the decision in CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 212 (SC) wherein…

I.T.O WD - 3(3), Purulia vs. Jamna Das Khothari(HUF), Purulia

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed partly and that of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2483/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 144Section 251Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member ITA No.2459 & 2483/Kol/2013 Assessment Year :2008-09 Jama Das Kothari (HUF) V/s. Income Tax Prop. of Sukhdeodas Officer,Ward-3(3), P.O. Jamundadas, Ranchi Road, Purulia, South Lake Purulia-723101 Road, P.O. Purulia, [PAN No.AACHK 4506 M] Pin-723101 ITO Ward-3(3), Income Tax Jamna Das Kothari Office, South Lake Road, (HUF), Ranchi Road, P.O. & Dit. Purulia, Pin- V/s. Purulia, Pin-723101 723101 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate आवे…

Jamna Das Kothari (HUF), Purulia vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(3), Purulia

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed partly and that of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2459/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 144Section 251Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member ITA No.2459 & 2483/Kol/2013 Assessment Year :2008-09 Jama Das Kothari (HUF) V/s. Income Tax Prop. of Sukhdeodas Officer,Ward-3(3), P.O. Jamundadas, Ranchi Road, Purulia, South Lake Purulia-723101 Road, P.O. Purulia, [PAN No.AACHK 4506 M] Pin-723101 ITO Ward-3(3), Income Tax Jamna Das Kothari Office, South Lake Road, (HUF), Ranchi Road, P.O. & Dit. Purulia, Pin- V/s. Purulia, Pin-723101 723101 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate आवे…

Adtiya Pareek, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Sikar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 108/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Ms.Sadaf Raies, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT-. DR

…ted in the previous year constitute good basis for estimating the GP/NP Rate. In this regard, useful reference can be drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Brij Bhushan Lal Purdan Kumar 115 ITR 540, The State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239, and Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd.(2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj.)(HC). In the instant case, the ld. AO has stated that he has carried out the comparison of the expenses claimed by the appellant with other similar assessees in the similar line of business. It is noted from perusal of the records that besides listing down the name of the comparable cases, the A…

Janta Construction Co., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 861/JPR/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)
Section 145(3)

…s. ACIT reported in 270 ITR 235 (iii) Collector Ram SharmaVs. DCIT [ITAT (JPR) in ITA no. 771/Jp/2012 (iv) Prashant Oil mill Vs. ITO [72 Taxmann.com 136 (Guj)] (v) 99 TTJ 164 Ajay Goyal Vs. ITO (Jd.) (vi) 5 ITR 170 (PC) CIT V/s Laxminarain Badridas (vii) 60 ITR 239 (SC) State of Kerala V/s Velukutty ITA 861/JP/2014_ 6 Janta Construction Co. Vs ITO (viii) 115 ITR 524 (SC) Brij Bhushan Lal Parduman Kumar, etc. V/s CIT, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and New Delhi-III Further he also pleaded that there was no need to disturb the declared results as the NP rate declared in the year under consideration was better…

ACIT-21(1), Mumbai vs. Karan Builders & Associated, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1432/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Acit- 21(1), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Karan Builders & Associates, 31, Jaihind Cottage, Shahji Raje Marg, Vile Parle – E, Mumbai - 57 Pan/Gir No. Aaffk5037N Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 145(3)

…not questioned or found suffering from mistakes of accounting. These observations are based on decisions in case of Brijbhusan lal Parduman Kumar 115 ITR 524(SC) where it has been held that the estimate must be honest and fair, State of Kerala Vs Vellllkutty 60 ITR 239(SC) where it was held that best judgment assessment must have reasonable nexus to the available material. In case of Uniword Telecom Ltd 45 DTR (Del)(Trib) 433, also where though it was held that the profits cannot be estimated de hors the book results on the grounds that purchases of goods from some of the vendors was not established, money' were…

Rajasthan Club, New Delhi vs. ADIT(E), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2649/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2002-03 Vs. Adit(E), Inv. Circle-Ii, New Rajasthan Club, Dp-22, Pitampura, New Delhi Delhi Pan : Aaatr6043G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. Gautam Jain & P.K. Kamal, Advocates Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 19.10.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 22/03/2010 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xi, New Delhi, For Assessment Year 2002-03 Raising Following Grounds: “ 1. The Appellant, Rajasthan Club Is Engaged In Charitable Activity During The Financial Year 2001-02. The Appellant Is A Regular Income Tax Assessee & Assessed To Income Tax For The Last Several Years. All Income, Assets & Investments Are Disclosed To Income Tax Department In Regular Income Tax Returns. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Assessing Officer & Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Was Incorrect & Unjustified In Making A Reference Of The Property In This Case To The Valuation Officer Without Any Reason Basis & Evidence.

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…out pointing out any specific faults in the vouchers or the books of accounts of the assessee. In support, thereof, the learned Authorized Representative relied on the following decisions: 1. 76 ITR 690(SC) state of Orissa versus maharaja Sh. BP Singh Deo. 2. 60 ITR 239 (SC) state of Kerala versus C Velukutty 3. 288 ITR 10 (SC), Kachwala Gems versus CIT 8.2 On the other hand, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative, relied on the order of the lower authorities. 8.3 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any specific vouche…

M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 474/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. JCIT, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 ACIT, Circl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 4366/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. JCIT, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 ACIT, Circl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 2561/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. JCIT, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 ACIT, Circl…

M/S. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 3967/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. JCIT, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (PAN: AAHFM3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 ACIT, Circl…