Tek Ram v. CIT

357 ITR 133Supreme Court of India2013#2681 most cited

What is Tek Ram v. CIT authority for?

When relevant documents or additional evidence have a direct bearing on an issue, they may be allowed to be produced or admitted at the appellate stage, potentially leading to a de novo adjudication by the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

44

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Tek Ram v. CIT · admission of additional evidence · production of documents · ITAT Rule 29 · de novo adjudication · appellate stage evidence · fresh consideration by AO · Section 250

Also reported as

262 CTR 11844 Taxmann.com 367

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 115BBESection 144Section 250Section 143(2)Section 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 282a(1)section 35adsection 35asection 142aadmission of additional evidencesection 151apanchnamaon-moneylong term capital gainsfaceless assessmentsection 35section 37(1)

Judgments citing Tek Ram v. CIT

Vinay Mittal, Sriganganagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Sriganganagar

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 382/JODH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blevinay Mittal Income Tax Officer, 3, J Block, Sriganganagar (Raj.) Ward No. -1, Ward No. 1 Keshrisinghpur Sriganganagar Sriganganagar Pan No. Avopm6894P Assessee By Shri Virendra Jain, Advocate (Physical) Revenue By Shri P.M. Mirdha, Addl. Cit- Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The Nfac/ Cit (A)] Dated 22.03.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 280Section 44ASection 68

…h was being belonging to his old CA who never complied with nor informed the Assessee about the notice issued by the AO and CIT(A) during the assessment proceedings. In support the AR has placed reliance on judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Tek Ram 262 CTR 118 for addition of additional evidence and Hon’ble 9 Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Mukta Metal Works 336 ITR 555 filed on record. 18. The additional evidences filed by the Assessee U/R 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 on vital documentary evidence which goes to the root of the matter and that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause to…

Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli vs. CIT- Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 175/PUN/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025
For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

…ed that in the interest of justice these additional evidences may be admitted and the impugned issue(s) may be decided after considering the same. In support thereof, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram Vs. CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133 wherein it has been held that where documents filed by the assessee before the Court had some relevance, the same should be considered while deciding the appeal. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the present appeal may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the assessee's application(s) for registration afresh spe…

Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli vs. CIT-Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 174/PUN/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025
For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

…ed that in the interest of justice these additional evidences may be admitted and the impugned issue(s) may be decided after considering the same. In support thereof, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram Vs. CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133 wherein it has been held that where documents filed by the assessee before the Court had some relevance, the same should be considered while deciding the appeal. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the present appeal may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the assessee's application(s) for registration afresh spe…

Ms. Zinki Ashish Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -41(3)4, Mumbai

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5475/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon'Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta- CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

…ain. It is pointed out that the statement of Shri Ritesh Burad and his assessment order would show that he was providing accommodation entries. On behalf of the appellant reliance is placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT (2014) 357 ITR 133 in order to submit that the documents being relevant may be allowed to be produced. 6. The learned DR has supported the impugned order. It is submitted that the appellant except making bald statement of her account being used for providing accommodation entries, has not corroborated or furnished any documents in support of her claim before the As…

Sher Singh, Sangrur vs. Income Tax Officer, Sangrur

ITA 749/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Soni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 11BSection 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 69a

…the AO and the CIT(A) have mechanically brushed aside the evidence. In fact, once the Ld. CIT(A) admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A, the same had to be given full weightage. Reliance was placed on decisions including Tek Ram (Dead) Through LRs v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC) and CIT v. Mukta Metal Works 336 ITR 555 (P&H), wherein it was held that additional evidence necessary for just adjudication must be admitted and appreciated. 7.3 Accordingly, the AR prayed that the entire addition sustained of ₹12,25,600/- deserves to be deleted as the deposits stand explained from disclosed and exempt sources. 8. On the ot…

Late Sh. Lakha Singh Through Legal Heir Hira Singh Dera Pyara Singh Barna Thanesar Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Near Community Hall Sector-5, Kurukshetra Haryana, Kurukshetra

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1151/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

…Ld. CIT(A) which were not admitted on surmises & conjectures. 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not admitting the additional evidences as submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tek Ram reported in 357 ITR 133 and of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Mukta Metal reported in 336 ITR 555. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer completed reassessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 on 09.12.2019, determ…

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Jagdishkumar M Gupta, Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4584/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Jagdishkumar M Gupta, Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4583/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Jagdishkumar M Gupta, Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4582/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri K Shivram Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR
Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Jagdishkumar M Gupta, Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4581/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4112/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4111/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4110/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

…U entered earlier – vide paper book no.3 consisting of 7 pages), vide application dated 02.04.2025 with the request for admission of the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1962 and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC). It was contended that the additional evidences now filed have direct bearing on the issue at hand and requested that the same be admitted and the matter be restored back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication of the issue by duly considering the additional evidence now filed. The Assessee contended that the amount received from Sumi…

Amit Mishra, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(1), Pune

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

ITA 892/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Kishore Phadke
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 6(1)(c)

…nt prays that in the interest of justice, the additional evidence may be admitted and the issue may be decided after considering the additional evidences. The appellant relies on the ratio laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram vs CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133/(2014) 44 taxmann.com 367 (SC) wherein it was held that where documents filed by the assessee before Court had some relevance, the same should be considered while deciding the appeal. Kindly permit the appellant to produce these documents and oblige.” 4. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose to this request. 5. I have heard the rival…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. Patson Agro Exports Private Limited, Pune City

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1404/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – CIT
Section 143(2)Section 41(1)

…ant prays that in the interest of justice, the additional evidence may be admitted and the issue may be decided after considering the additional evidence. The appellant relies on the ratio laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram vs CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133/(2014) 44 taxmann.com 367 (SC) wherein it was held that where documents filed by the assessee before Court had some relevance, the same should be considered while deciding the appeal. Kindly permit the Appellant to produce these documents and oblige.” 11. So far as the first issue i.e. the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC restricting the addition…

Nipro Tube Glass Private Limited, Thane vs. Additional, New Delhi

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

ITA 2689/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…cient cause for not producing the same before the Ld. AO and also despite the fact that the additional evidence was crucial for deciding the matter. The appellant has also put reliance on the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram vs. CIT (2014) 357 ITR 133 (SC) wherein it was held that where documents filed by assessee before the Court had some relevance, same should be considered while deciding appeal. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that in application under rule 46A, assessee has given the detail of additional evidence and the reasons for its admission and it was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which is now…

Ace Cabs Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Delhi, C R Building

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanace Cabs Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaica4494R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 04.10.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short]/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 12.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Submitted An Application Under Rule 29 Of The Itat Rules For Admitting The Additional Evidences & The Contents Thereof Are Reproduced Below:-

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACE Cabs Limited, vs. ACIT, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (PAN : AAICA4494R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date of Order : 04.10.2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 Nasshik, Nashik vs. Harsh Constructions Private Limited, Nashik

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

ITA 302/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 Pan: Aacch2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2023 Of The Cit(A) / Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In The Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance To Rs.2,24,191/- As Against Rs.1,25,51,607/- Proposed By The Assessing Officer In The Remand Report As Against Rs.4,38,96,880/- Added By Him In The Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj S. DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133Section 133(5)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Rule, 1962 as the AO has failed to give opportunity of the enquiry/verification conducted u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before making addition. Further, following ratio of various courts including the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Tek Ram Vs. CIT, 262 CTR 118 (SC) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court admitted the additional evidence being relevant and required to be looked into. Further, I relied upon various judgements in said matter, as under : 1. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs Manish Build Well (P) Ltd. 204 Taxman 106 (Del) wherein their lordships held that once…

Khanna Infrabuild Private Limited 2000-1A, Sukhdev Nagar Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2 Ludhiana, Ludhiana

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 679/CHANDI/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jun 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 145(3)Section 153ASection 35ASection 69

…be admitted as additional evidence under Rule 46A since the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause in not submitting the same to the Ld. AO and reference was drawn to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram reported at 357 ITR 133 in which it has been held that additional evidence even if, it is submitted before the High Court/Apex Court, the same deserves to be admitted provided it as a nexus to the issue in hand. It was submitted that this certificate is very much relevant to their claim of deduction u/s 35AD and, therefore, the same deserves admission. 24. The submissi…

Khanna Infrabuild Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle)-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 668/CHANDI/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jun 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 145(3)Section 153ASection 35ASection 69

…be admitted as additional evidence under Rule 46A since the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause in not submitting the same to the Ld. AO and reference was drawn to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram reported at 357 ITR 133 in which it has been held that additional evidence even if, it is submitted before the High Court/Apex Court, the same deserves to be admitted provided it as a nexus to the issue in hand. It was submitted that this certificate is very much relevant to their claim of deduction u/s 35AD and, therefore, the same deserves admission. 24. The submissi…