How many judgments cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT?

1,967 judgments on BharatTax cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sumati Dayal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 115BBE.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT

214 ITR 801Supreme Court of India1995#12 most cited

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

1,967

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,302 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumati Dayal v CIT · Section 68 · human probabilities · genuineness of transaction · true nature of transaction · accommodation entry · bogus capital gains · penny stock · look behind apparent form · preponderance of probability · colourable device · unexplained loans

Also reported as

80 Taxmann 89125 CTR 124

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 115BBE Section 69C Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price rigging colourable device preponderance of probability bogus ltcg penny stock section 10(38)entry operator addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction accommodation entry share application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…was having enough evidences for making addition which includes sworn in statement of the appellant, statement of other partners and the seized document. The appellant relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC). The appellant has not explained how this decision supports his case. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/[1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03- 1995] held as under:- "It is, no doubt, true that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on t…

Ishoo Narang, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 147Section 68

…ecting the retraction filed by appellant is upheld and confirmed. 7.16. ln view of the above mentioned facts, the material brought on record by the A0, and the decision of CIT vs Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 and the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (supra) 214 ITR 801 (SC), the test of human probabilities needs to be applied and true nature of the transaction has to be ascertained in light of the surrounding circumstances. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the appellant has indulged in dubious share transaction meant to account for the undisclosed income in the garb of Capital Ga…

Anju Chirania, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3158/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIALMEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Anju Chirania, Vs. ITO, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, JSS Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. PAN/GIR No. AFCPC9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant by Ms.Ritu Kamal Kishore & Shri.Ravi Ganatra. AR Respondent by Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha.Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 07.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 25.09.2024 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The as…

ITO-22(1)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber vs. Gehrilal Rooplal Paliwal, Andheri East

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

ITA 3614/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 68

…the real test with regard to genuineness of the transaction is "Preponderance of Probabilities and not "Beyond reasonable doubt". Reliance is placed on C Vasantlal& Co Vs CT (1962) 45 IFR 206 (SC) Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and SumatiDaval Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) One has to consider the totality of facts, surrounding circumstances and human probability for arriving at a conclusion as held in CIT Vs. Durga Prasad H2 ITR $40 (SC) and SumatiDayal Vs. CIT (1995) 2141TR 801 (SC). (x) The purchases from hawala operator falls within the ambit of the term colourable devices and the Hon'ble Supreme Court obse…

Florence Agro Farms, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-23(1)(6), Mumbai

ITA 2093/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

Section 10(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 2093 & 2092/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Florence Agro Farms, F-11, 3rd floor, Manek Mahal, 90, Veer Nariman Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AABFF 5181 C Appellant Vs. ITO Ward 23(1)(6), Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400020. Respondent Assessee by Revenue by Mr. J B Bairagra/Ms. Rupa Nanda Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement ORDER 09/07/2024 23/09/2024 PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the assess…

Florence Agro Farms, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 23(1)(6), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 2092/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. J B Bairagra/Ms. Rupa Nanda

Section 10(1)Section 68

…probability has again been reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxma [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was n 89/214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was specifically pronounced that revenue authorities are supposed 'to specifically pronounced that revenue authorities are supposed 'to specifically pronounced that revenue authorities are supposed 'to consider the surrounding circumstances and apply human consider the surrounding circumstanc…

Nathu Lal Jain HUF, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 859/JPR/2024[2011-2012]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tanuj Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 139Section 148Section 68

…converted unaccounted money into fictitious exempt LTCG to evade taxes. The finding is unsupported by material on record & is purely an assumption based on conjecture The theory of human behavior and preponderance of probabilities, based on Sumati Dayal v CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC), cannot be cited as a basis to turn a blind eye to the evidence 5. AO acted merely on surmises and conjectures: All the material evidences on record were brushed aside and the genuine share transactions were wrongly treated-as-bogus merely on suspicion, surmises and conjectures. Reliance is being placed on the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mill…

Khoobsoorat Fabrics Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 14(3), New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 428/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 68

…and bank account statements, which including human probability has been the Ld. CIT(A) can easily examine the laid down by the Supreme Court in the surrounding circumstances too. But cases of Sumati Dayal vs CIT [1995] the Ld. Authorities failed to do so and 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT v. Durga Proceeded with the addition in hands Prasad More (1971) 82ITR 540, pp. of the asseseee. 13 545, 547). The law pronounced by the Supreme Court is binding under Article ii) In CIT v. Durga Prasad More: In 141 of Constitution of India. The this case the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in Sumati Dayal vs Court to de…

M/S Toplink Commerce Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

ITA 1413/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jalan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 68

…Toplink Commerce Ltd. AY: 2012-13 ii. Merely because the share application with huge and unjustified share premium was received from corporate entities from banking channel, no enquiry was warranted is not a sustainable plea (relied by the ITAT – 82 ITR 540, 214 ITR 801, 63 ITR 609). iii. it is incumbent on the assessee to prove and establish the identity of the subscribers, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transaction. Once materials to prove these ingredients are produced, it is for the Assessing Officer to find out as to whether on these materials the assessee was able to establish the ingred…

Venkateshwara Wires Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 322/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2018-19 cuke Venkateswara Wires Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Vs. E-55, Road No. 5, VKI Area, Income Tax, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCV 5085 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh vksj…

ITO-28(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ashwini Mahesh Khairnar, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2660/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 144BSection 147Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…s and circumstances of the cases and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the true nature of transactions have to be ascertained in the light of surrounding circumstances as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SumatiDayal V/s CIT (214 ITR 801) and Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540)” 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual engaged in profession of TV Artist, doing TV Advertisement Serial, Web Series, Music Albums and event etc. The AO based on the information received from INSIGHT portal under NMS category observed that the assessee had made the high volume tr…

Jayantilal Bhagwanchand, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 735/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ramanathan, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 68

…the facts involved in the present case are identical to modus operandi identified by the DDIT. Therefore, the AO in view of the above and after referring to judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Durga Prasad Moore in 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal in 214 ITR 801 where the test of preponderance of human probability and surrounding circumstantial evidence was discussed, treated the LTCG on the script of M/s Comfort Intech Ltd as sham transaction. Thus, the AO disallowed the claim of exempt long-term capital gain on the sale of impugned scripts for Rs. 10,86,720/- and added to the total income of the assess…

ITO-26(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ravi Realtors, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3796/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Smt Mahita Nair (Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Dharan Gandhi

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 4

…e real test with regard to genuineness of the transaction is "Preponderance of Probabilities" and not "Beyond reasonable doubt" Reliance is placed on C. Vasantilal& Co. Vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and SumatiDayalVs.CIT(1996)214 ITR 801(SC). One has to consider 3 Ravi Realtors the totality of facts, surrounding circumstances and human probability for arriving at a conclusion as held in CIT Vs. Durga Prasad 82ITR 540(SC)." 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the…

Shri Bhagwati Farms, Alwar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 452/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 115Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC’’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 452/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Shri Bhagwati Farms The DCIT Vs. Bhagwati Sadan Central Circle Swami Dayanand Marg, Alwar Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8812 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Dat…

Ovez Arifbhai Lakhani, Bhavnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

For Appellant: Shri Bharat R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-D.R

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

…n’ble Supreme Court in the case of Suman Poddar(supra) ; judgment and order of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of PCIT v. Swati Bajaj, ITA No. 06 of 2022, dated 14.06.2022.; judgment and order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dyal v. CIT 214 ITR 801. The ld. PCIT rightly invoked provisions of section 263 on the ground that the Assessing Officer while accepting the returned income during the course of re-assessment proceedings has not asked for demat account, and had not made proper inquiries as were required to be made , also keeping in view the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case…

Sukhpal Singh, Greater Noida vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(3)(5), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1080/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

…nuineness of the transactions entered into the books of account of the assesses. The Human Probability Test were laid down for the first time in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) and followed in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). Further it was also applied thereafter in numerous cases by the various courts. In the instant case the appellant being an agriculturalist the practice of withdrawing money from the bank and retained at house for all practical purposes qualifies the Human Probability Test. Hence the addition made by the AO without any legal and justified re…

Goyal Vegoils Limited, Kasar, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle -2, Kota

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

ITA 243/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…15 Taxman 581 (Guj.) (xx) Smt. Sunita Dhadda v. Dy. CIT [2013] 33 taxmann.com 639 (JP.- Trib.) 2.11The Ld.CIT(A) has finally relied on the tests of human probability in confirming the addition, referring to the decisions in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (214 ITR 801) Reliance placed by him on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (supra) is wholly misplaced. In that case, the assessee therein had claimed income from horse races and the finding of fact recorded was that the assessee therein had not participated in races, but purchased winning tickets after the race, with the unaccounted m…

Meezan Realtors P. Ltd, Calicut vs. The ACIT, Calicut

ITA 369/COCH/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 68

…d duly filed in the course of assessment as well as before the CIT(A) in the lower appellate proceedings. We are of the considered view that mere filing of such documentary evidence hardly discharges the assessee’s onus in light of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC); CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., vs. PCIT [2019] 412 ITR 161 (SC). Faced with this situation, we confirm both the learned lower authorities respective findings regarding the impugned balance figures of Rs.20 lakhs in assessment year 2004-2005 and Rs.35,10,000/- in assessment year 2005-2006, re…

Meezan Realtors P. Ltd, Calicut vs. The ACIT, Calicut

ITA 368/COCH/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 68

Meezan Realtors P. Ltd, Calicut vs. The ACIT, Calicut

ITA 367/COCH/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 68