How many judgments cite State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo?

40 judgments on BharatTax cite State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (76 ITR 690), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 144, Section 144B, Section 145(3), Section 133(6), Section 139(1), Section 143(3).

State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo

76 ITR 690Supreme Court of India1970#2958 most cited

What is State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo authority for?

An assessment order enhancing income without disclosing the basis of enhancement and relying on mere suspicion is not sustainable. Best judgment assessment must be based on relevant material and cannot be arbitrary.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo · best judgment assessment · section 144 · rejection of books of account · arbitrary assessment · enhancement of assessment · relevant material · unsubstantiated assumptions · sec 145(3) · sec 144B

Sections most often in play

Section 144 Section 144B Section 145(3)Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

rejection of books of account best judgment assessment section 145(3)section 44ab section 145 section 44 genuineness of the transaction section 144 business company section 14 india

Judgments citing State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo

M/S. Matha Enterprises, Angamally vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 303/COCH/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM &Shri George George K, JM ITA No.302/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year2001-2002 ITA No.303/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year2002-2003 ITA No.304/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year2003-2004 ITA No.305/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year2004-2005 ITA No.306/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year2005-2006 ITA No 307/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year 2006-2007 ITA No.308/Coch/2010 :Asst.Year 2007-2008 M/s. Matha Enterprises, Vs. The Assistant Near KSRTC Bus Station, Commissioner of Income- Thrissur Road, tax, Central Circle-1, Angamaly. Kochi. PAN:AADFM 8097N] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) IT…

DCIT, Ernakulam vs. Matha Enterprises, Angamally

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 269/COCH/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

R.K.Madhani & Co., Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15

ITA 1471/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2014-15 R.K. Madhani & Co, The Dy. Commissioner Of 127-136, Income Tax, Madhani Estate, 542 Central Circle 8(1), Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Dadar (W), Karve Road, Mumbai - 400028 Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaaefr6706J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anant N. Pai (Ar) Revenue By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2019

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)

Section 142Section 143Section 144

…e, the Ld. CIT (A) has not pointed out the reason for rejecting the books of account. The Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC), State of Orisa vs. Maharaja Shri V.P Deo 76 ITR 690 (SC) and Brijbhushan Lal Praduman Kumar vs. CIT 115 ITR 524 (SC), in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that while making best judgment assessment, the authority must take an honest and fair estimate of income of the assessee and same must not be capricious but should have reasonable nexus to the available material and circumstances of the c…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, cross objections preferred by the assessee in CO

ITA 233/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.232 To 235/Rpr/2014 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar

Section 132

…ssessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) : TC11R.251 that “The mere fact that the material placed by the assessee before the assessing authority is unreliable does not empower those authorities to make an arbitrary order. The power of levy assessment on the basis of best judgment is not an arbitrary power; it is an assessment on the basis of best judgment. In other words, that asses…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, cross objections preferred by the assessee in CO

ITA 232/BIL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar

Section 132

Akzo Nobel India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 621/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92

…d on the following precedents: i) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC); 10 Akzo Nobel India Ltd., AY 2012-13 ii) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) and iii) State of Orissa Vs. Maharaja Shri B. P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC). The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has its policy of giving the cash discount and publicity and advertisement expenses from past several years and the assessee has claimed cash discount expenses and publicity and advertisement expenses in preceding years as well. However, the department has never questioned the said expenses in…

M/S. Valentine Cine Vision Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2438/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR

Section 43B

…the judgments in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC); Raghubir Mandal Harihar Mandal v. State of Bihar [1957] 8 STC 770 (SC); State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty [1966] 60 ITR 239 (SC); State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo [1970] 76 ITR 690 (SC); Brij Bhusan Lal Parduman 12 ITA 2419, CO 181, ITA 2438/Ahd/2015 Kumar v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 524 (SC); Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam); R.V.S. and Sons Dairy Farm v. CIT [2002] 257 ITR 764 (Mad); International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J & K) ; M. Durai Raj v. CIT [1972] 83 ITR 484 (Ker); Ramchandra Ramnivas…

ACIT 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Vinod Kumar Anand, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1591/MUM/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2002-03 Acit-1(2)(2), Shri Vinod Kumar Anand, R. No.535, 5Th Floor, 1, Mistry Court, 208, Dinshaw बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Vacha Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaapa9763A

Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…aterial for making the disallowance?. 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was correct in not appreciating the fact that the Ld. CIT(A) relied upon a judgment (State of Orissa vs Maharaja Shri B P Singh (1970 76 ITR 690 S.C.). which is regarding the ‘best judgment assessment’ whereas the order in the case was made u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147?”. 2. The brief, facts of the case are that the assessee is individual and director of M/s. Karimjee Pvt. Ltd. The assessee has filed return of income for the impugned assessment year u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein…

The ITO, Ward-4(4), Surat vs. M/S. Valentine Cine Vision Limited, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2419/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR

Section 43B

Bholanath R.Shukla, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-2, Thane

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 4505/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…s work in best judgment assessment which shall not be wild one; the default of the assessee does not enable the assessing authority to function capriciously. Further Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of State of Orissa Vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) has laid down that the mere fact that the material placed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer is unreliable does not empower the officer to make arbitrary order. On similar facts Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of C. B. Aggarwal 15 Shri Bholanath R. Shukla upheld the invoking the section 145(2) and assessing income on estimat…

Hydroair Tectonics (Pcd) Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 3949/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…ssessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) : TC11R.251 that "The mere fact that the material placed by the assessee before the assessing authorities is unreliable does not empower those authorities to make an arbitrary order. The power to levy assessment on the basis of best judgment is not an arbitrary power; it is an assessment on the basis of best judgment. In other words, that ass…

Rajkumari Singh, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 8, Mumbai

ITA 946/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…ssessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) : TC11R.251 that "The mere fact that the material placed by the assessee before the assessing authorities is unreliable does not empower those authorities to make an arbitrary order. The power to levy assessment on the basis of best judgment is not an arbitrary power; it is an assessment on the basis of best judgment. In other words, that ass…

Sheth & Sura Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

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

ITA 382/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri P.S. Chaudhury, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri D.R. BarveFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das

Section 143(3)

…lls Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [26 ITR 775 (SC)] b) Tripat Kaur Vs. ACIT, Cir 22(1), New Delhi, [ITA No.3244/Del/2012]. c) ITO Vs. Lake Palace Hotels and Motels (P.) Ltd. [13 TTJ (JP) 216] d) State of Orissa Vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo [1970] [76 ITR 690 (SC)]” 3. All the grounds being inter-connected are considered together. 4. Before us, at the outset, Ld.A.R. submitted that the only effective ground is with respect to disallowance of labour charges and he further 3 submitted that in the ground the amount was erroneously stated as Rs.27,40,716/- and it should be read as Rs.27,89,884/-. 5. A…

DCIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Trimurthi Developers, Navi Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5052/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM ITA No.5053/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year :2007-08) DCIT 15(3)(4) / ITO 15(3)(4) Vs. M/s. Trimurthi Developers R.No.115, 112, Bawa Tower Matru Mandir Plot No.78/79, Sector – 17 Tardeo, Mumbai – 400008 Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703 PAN/GIR No. AADFT2589A Appellant) Respondent) .. Revenue by Shri Saurabh Deshpande Assessee by Shri Nilesh Joshi Date of Hearing 23/02/2018 Date of Pronouncement 16/04/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): These are appeals filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) for…

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)

…ch, were not produced and he made disallowance in ad-hoc manner without 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 fin…

ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 432/KOL/2012[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :1998-99 Ito Ward-1(3), Room V/S. M/S Gkw Ltd., Central No. 1A, 4Th Floor, Plaza, 2/6 Sarat Bose Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Road, Office Space No. Chowringhee Suquare, 406, 4Thfloor, Kolkata-20 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No. Aabcg 0671 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145A

…ll opportunity to meet the substance of any private inquiries made by the AO if it is intended to make the estimate on the foot of those enquiries. Further reliance of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P.Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) has held that assessment made by assessing authorities must be based on some relevant material and unreliabilit9y of material placed before them does not mean that they can proceed to levy whatever tax they may levy. Similar view has also been taken in the case of Brij Bhushan Lal Parduman Kumar vs. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524 (SAC) where the Hon’…

M/S. Shivgori Builders (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 847/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 847/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 M/s Shivgori Builders (P) Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Income Flat No. 4, R. R. Apartments, 3- Tax, Central Circle-15(Old), 4, Manglapuri, Mehrauli, Central Circle-14 (New), New Delhi-110030 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKCS2489J Assessee by : Sh. Gautam Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 04.12.2015 of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi Hospital Supply Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3996/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Oct 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv. &For Respondent: Md. Mohsin Alam, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

…through the paper book and has submitted that in the absence of any basis given by the AO for making the disallowances, the same is not tenable. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the decision in case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri BP Singh Deo 76 ITR 690 (SC); Goodyear India Ltd. vs. ITO 73 ITD 189 (Del.); Hughes Escorts Communications Ltd. vs. JCIT 106 TTJ 1065 (Del.) among other cases. The appellant has placed a comparative chart to establish that expenditure has been incurred for the purpose of business of the appellant company in each of the year under consideration and no disallowance has bee…

The Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited

ITA/149/2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 143

…aram Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madhya Pradesh, 57 ITR 335, Union of India and Another Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan and ITA No.149/2008 Page 11 of 11 Another 263 ITR 706 and State of Orissa Vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo, 76 ITR 690. 11. That apart, we find no reason, justification or rationale for the Assessing Officer to inflate the value of land by 50% and reduced the value of bottles and crates by 50%. In fact, while doing so, the AO does not give any basis or the yardsticks adopted by him. 12. In the facts of this case, therefore, we are of the opinion that…

The Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited

ITA - 149 / 2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Section 143

…in accordance with law laid down by the courts in various judgments including in Kalooram Govindaram Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madhya Pradesh, 57 ITR 335, 2011:DHC:1838-DB Another 263 ITR 706 and State of Orissa Vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo, 76 ITR 690. 11. That apart, we find no reason, justification or rationale for the Assessing Officer to inflate the value of land by 50% and reduced the value of bottles and crates by 50%. In fact, while doing so, the AO does not give any basis or the yardsticks adopted by him. 12. In the facts of this case, therefore, we are of the opinion that…