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.

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 801)

Netlink Solutions (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 10(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1657/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Netlink Solutions (India) Income-Tax, Pvt. Ltd. 10(3)(1), 57, Laxmi Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Room No.212, Laxmi Industrial Estate, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, New Link Road, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Andheri West, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 069 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv3426V M/S Netlink Solutions (India) The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, 57, Laxmi Plaza, 10(3)(1), 2Nd Floor, Room No.212, Laxmi Industrial Estate, Vs. New Link Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Andheri West, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 069 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agarwal, Adv &For Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, SR. AR

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 143(3)

…y concluded that the price of the above shares had been artificially hiked or lowered through circular trading in a complete violation of mechanism of stock exchange’. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC), he held that assessee has non-genuine capital gain or loss. However, he allowed the set off of the Capital Gain against Capital Loss and disallowed net capital loss of ₹12,05,287/-. Therefore, assessee as well as the learned Assessing Officer both are aggrieved and are in appeal by cross appeals before us. 012. Learned Authorised Represent…

Kuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 582/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrir. K. Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: ShriHemant Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 68

…e not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. They were entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents”. (b) In the case of SumatiDayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801, the court observed, “Thus, in our opinion, is a superficial approach to the problem. The matter has to be considered in the light of human probabilities. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the view of the chairman in his dissenting opinion. In our opinion, the majority opinion after considering the surrounding circumstances and applying the…

Kuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 581/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrir. K. Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: ShriHemant Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 68

…e not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. They were entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents”. (b) In the case of SumatiDayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801, the court observed, “Thus, in our opinion, is a superficial approach to the problem. The matter has to be considered in the light of human probabilities. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the view of the chairman in his dissenting opinion. In our opinion, the majority opinion after considering the surrounding circumstances and applying the…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Aarti Catalyst Solution Pvt. Ltd, Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1195/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…hold that it was income. If, however, the evidence was unconvincing, then such rejection could be made. The Department cannot by merely rejecting a good explanation unreasonably, convert good proof into no proof." C. In the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801/80 Taxman 89 (SC), at page 805, the Supreme Court has clearly explained the point of approach to be followed both by the assessee and the Department, in the context of section 68 of the Act, in the following words (page 805) :"It is no doubt true that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies upon the Depart…

Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Smt. Indira D Thakkar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 969/MUM/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 1999-2000 The Dy. Cit, Central Circle-6(4), Smt. Indira D. Thakkar, Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air 12/22B, Acropolis, Malabar Hills, India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 006 Vs. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabpt 3389 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Sunil A. Umap, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Mr. Dilip Thakkar, Ar Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Dilip Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil A. Umap, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)

…oceeds of the RIB not linked with the Chhaganlal Suchak Family Trust created and the assessee herself was the trustee thereof not only that but the reliance is also placed in judgment of Hon"ble Supreme Court Sumati Dayal Vs. Commissioner of Income tax (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC), in the case of CIT v Durga Prasad more [1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC), in which it is categorically held that preponderance of probability is against the assessee in such cases where necessary evidence is received but not rebutted by the assessee in spite of adequate opportunities granted. It is therefore clear that the assessee along with her famil…

ACIT. Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Eipr India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7471/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit – Circle – 3(1)(2) V. M/S. Eipr India Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 607, 6Th Floor G-11, Tulsiani Chambers Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fress Press Journal Marg Mumbai - 400020 Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaace9094M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department By Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi

Section 14ASection 69C

…same is required to be allowed as qualified business expense and such expense cannot be considered as against public policy. (m) The Assessee Company also relies on the directly applicable order of The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SumatiDayal vs. CIT (214 ITR 801) where it has been held that for considering whether the apparent is real, matter has to be considered by applying the test of human probabilities’. Applying the ratio, it has to be concluded that the nature of business of the appellant is such that payment of secret nature to informants cannot be avoided. Moreover, the source of informant fees i…

The the Income Tax Officer, Janjgir Champa vs. M/S M/S Agrata Retail Pvt Ltd, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed, with no order as to cost

ITA 268/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battull

For Appellant: Shri R. B. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri G. N. Singh

Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…on by the AO in the assessment order.” “5. Whether on points of law and on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not distinguishing the ratio of the case laws such as CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [82 ITR 540(SC)], Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [214 ITR 801 (SC)] and CIT vs. Shri Meenakshi Mills Ltd. [63 ITR 609 (SC) as relied upon by the AO in the assessment order.” “6. Whether on points of law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred by giving a finding which is contrary to the ratio of the decisions of ITAT Kolkata ‘B’ Bench in the case of M/s Subhlakshmi Vanijya (P) Ltd., Vs. CIT-1, Kolkata in ITA No. 1104/Kol/…

Bharat Jha-HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-37(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6834/DEL/2019[2013+-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 148Section 250Section 68

…case of such massive proportion involving thousands of crores of rupees. 5.1 DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY ITAT/COURTS IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE ON THE ISSUE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN PENNY STOCK CASES CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) • SumatiDayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) • Me Dowell & Co. 154 ITR 148 (SC) • SomNathMaini, 306 ITR 414 (HC) • Ashok Mahehdru& Sons (HUF) v CIT 173 TAXMANN 178 (HC) • Hersh Win ChadhaVs DCIT 135 TTJ 513(ITATDelhi) • Arvind M KariyaVs ACIT IN ITA No. 7024/Mum/2010 (ITAT Mumbai) • 5.2. DECISIONS IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE ON THE ISSUE OF RULE OF EVIDENCE AO is a quasi - judicial authori…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. J.P.Fincorp Service Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2517/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsr. Asstt. Name Of Name Of Ita/It(Ss)A No. Year Appellant Respondent J. P. Fincorp Services Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Iscon House, Opp Circle-1(1)(1), Associated Petrol 1. 2012-13 Ahmedabad-380015 Pump, Off C G Road, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan:Aabcj8599F Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. [Formerly Known As J. P. Fincorp Services Pvt. Ltd. Dcit C.O. No. 2012-13 2. “Iscon House”, Opp. Circle-1(1)(1), 199/Ahd/2016 Associated Petrol Ahmedabad-380019 Pump, Off. C. G. Road, Ahmedabad- 380015 Pan:Aabcj8599F (Applicant) (Responent) : Ms. Nupur Shah, Ca Assessee By : Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, Cit Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/01/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

…out through banking channel is not sufficient. As such the same should also be proven by circumstantial surrounding evidences as held by the Hon’ble supreme court in case of Durga Prasad More reported in 82 ITR 540 and in case of Smt. Sumati Dayal reported in 214 ITR 801. 21.1 The last stage comes to verify the creditworthiness of the parties. The term creditworthiness as per Black Law Dictionary refers as: "creditworthy, adj. (1924) (Of a borrower) financially sound enough that a lender will extend credit in the belief default is unlikely; fiscally healthy-creditworthiness.” 21.2 Similarly in The New Lexicon We…

J. Builders Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 10 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7203/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…he reliability of the evidence placed before a court or tribunal. Therefore, the courts and Tribunals have to judge the evidence before them by applying the test of human probabilities". Similarly, in a later decision in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801/80 Taxman 89 (SC), Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected the theory that it is for alleger to prove that the apparent and not , and observed that, "This, in our opinion, is a superficial approach to the problem. The matter has to be considered in the light of human probabilities". .........................................................................…

Raghav Softech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 20(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7127/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Raghav Softech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Vardhman Grand Plaza, Manglam Ward-20(4) Place, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi New Delhi Aaecr2527G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2022

Section 147Section 148Section 69

…probabilities property arising from the facts alleged or proved and by doing so the Tribunal does net indulge in conjectures, surmises or suspicions. The apex Court expressed a similar view in the case of Summati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 125 CTR (SC) 124 ; (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and held that the decision of an adjudicating body based on surrounding circumstances and human probabilities is not bad in law and deserves to be upheld. In the case of McDowell d Co. Ltd vs. CTO (1985) 47CTR (SC) 126 : (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), the apex Court held that colourable devices are not part of legitimate tax planning, Going by the…

Rajeshkumar Chamaria, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 796/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Section 143(3)

…tating that the payments to creditors are made through account payee cheques in subsequent year. The case of the assessee is defies the human probability test laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 5 Rajeshkumar chamaria [214 ITR 801]. The undersigned therby relies upon the decision of Hon’ble Surpeme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal(supra) and held that the transactions of the assessee are beyond the test of human probability and the AO has correctly assessed 0.55% of the creditors of 44,09,531/- amounting to Rs. 24.252/- as bogus. I therefore confirm the addition of Rs. 24…

Rama Devi Singareddy, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 512/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A. SrinivasFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Majumdar

Section 143

…d only prove her father-in-law’s ownership on land measuring 6.30 acres only without having any clarity about his other sources of income, family size and other relevant aspects. We quote hon’ble apex court’s landmark decisions in Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) [214 ITR 801] (SC) and CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) [82 ITR 540] (SC) that any evidence submitted during the course of income tax proceedings has to be examined in light of human probabilities by removing all blinkers to conclude that the learned lower authorities have rightly made the impugned addition in assessee’s hands. She fails in her sole substanti…

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT-CC-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 237/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 236/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Shri. Shripal Raj Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT-CC-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 1336/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Smt. Shruti Lodha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 621/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Smt. Shruti Lodha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 620/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Shri. Shripal Raj Lodha, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 619/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 618/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)

…hat the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to as the test of preponderance of human probability judged on the basis of surrounding circumstances. The Assessing officer relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of 540 and also Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4. The Assessing Officer further held that for earning the said income the Assessee must have incurred certain expenditure, in the form of commission which would have been charged by the alleged entry operators with respect to the transaction of capital gains. The Assessing Officer accordingly estimated 6% of the total capital gain as the…

Sumati Dayal v. CIT

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Netlink Solutions (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 10(3)(1), Mumbai

Kuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

Kuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Aarti Catalyst Solution Pvt. Ltd, Vadodara

Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Smt. Indira D Thakkar, Mumbai

ACIT. Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Eipr India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

The the Income Tax Officer, Janjgir Champa vs. M/S M/S Agrata Retail Pvt Ltd, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)

Bharat Jha-HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-37(1), New Delhi

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. J.P.Fincorp Service Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

J. Builders Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 10 (2)(1), Mumbai

Raghav Softech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 20(4), New Delhi

Rajeshkumar Chamaria, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(5), Mumbai

Rama Devi Singareddy, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Hyderabad

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT-CC-4(4), Mumbai

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

Shri. Shripal Raj Lodha, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT-CC-4(4), Mumbai

Smt. Shruti Lodha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

Smt. Shruti Lodha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

Shri. Shripal Raj Lodha, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai

Smt. Sarita Lodha, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 4(4), Mumbai