Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT

37 ITR 271Supreme Court of India1959#112 most cited

What is Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT authority for?

An income tax assessment or addition cannot be sustained solely on the basis of suspicion, surmises, or conjectures, as strong suspicion does not amount to proof. The revenue authorities must rely on concrete evidence and material to frame an assessment.

567

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT · suspicion not proof · no addition on surmises · conjectures and suspicion · burden of proof income tax · Section 68 cash credits · Section 132(4) statement · assessment without evidence · Section 37(1) business expenditure · genuineness of transaction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 68Section 148Section 153ASection 69C

Issues it is cited on

price riggingdumb documentssection 132(4a)statement under section 132(4)bogus long term capital gainsection 292cretracted statementloose paperson-moneybogus ltcgsection 132(4)penny stock

Judgments citing Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT

M/S Shubham Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd., Ellenabad vs. DCIT, Circle, Sirsa

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1416/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Oct 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234Section 234B

…5/2011(Del) dt. 06/03/2012 • CIT Vs. Jacksons House 198 Taxman 385 (Del) • CIT Vs. Winner Constructions (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 796/2011(Del) dt. 03/05/2012 • Lunar Electricals Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 195/2006(Del) dt. 22/03/2012 • Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. Vs. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC) • Omar Salay Mohammad Sait Vs. CIT 37 ITR 151 (SC) • Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs. CIT, Bombay 26 ITR 736 (SC) • Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC) • Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT 37 ITR 288 • CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. 163 Taxman 482 (Del) • Nathu Ram Prem Chand Vs. CIT 49 ITR 561 (All) • EMC Machine Works Vs. CIT 4…

Dy CIT 11 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Varesh Securities Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 262/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 262/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 263/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Dcit-11(3)(1) बिधम/ Varesh Securities Pvt. Ltd. Room No.427, Aayakar 101, Laxmi Plaza, Laxmi Vs. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Marine Industrial Estate, New Link Lines, Mumbai-400020. Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg1667L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Ms. Usha Gaikwad (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/10/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 25.10.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2010-11 & 2012-13. Ita. Nos.262 & 263/Mum/2020 A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sashi TulsiyanFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…tly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raising interference to that effect. Also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shah & Bros. Vs. CIT 37 ITR 271 held that suspicion however strong, cannot take the place of evidence. 6.2.6 Further, reliance can be placed on below mention judgments: - (i)The Hon‟ble CALCUTTA HIGH COURT in the case of BLB CABLES & ONDUCTORS [ITA No. 78 of 2017] dated 19.06.2018. The High Court Id vide Para 4.1: “…..we find that all the transactions through the broker were…

Pawan Kumar Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 202/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…sion of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 151) wherein it was held that the suspicion however strong could not partake the character of legal evidence as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umacharan Shaw & Bros. V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 271). The additions made on mere presumptions could not be sustained and there must be something more than mere suspicion to support the assessment as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. V/s CIT (26 ITR 775). The assessment should not be ITA Nos.199to202/Ind/2019 Ashish Chhaparia(others) vs. ITO Asst.Years –2011-12…

Manish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 201/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…sion of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 151) wherein it was held that the suspicion however strong could not partake the character of legal evidence as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umacharan Shaw & Bros. V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 271). The additions made on mere presumptions could not be sustained and there must be something more than mere suspicion to support the assessment as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. V/s CIT (26 ITR 775). The assessment should not be ITA Nos.199to202/Ind/2019 Ashish Chhaparia(others) vs. ITO Asst.Years –2011-12…

Manish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 200/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…sion of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 151) wherein it was held that the suspicion however strong could not partake the character of legal evidence as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umacharan Shaw & Bros. V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 271). The additions made on mere presumptions could not be sustained and there must be something more than mere suspicion to support the assessment as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. V/s CIT (26 ITR 775). The assessment should not be ITA Nos.199to202/Ind/2019 Ashish Chhaparia(others) vs. ITO Asst.Years –2011-12…

Ashish Chhaparia, Mumbai vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 199/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…sion of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 151) wherein it was held that the suspicion however strong could not partake the character of legal evidence as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umacharan Shaw & Bros. V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 271). The additions made on mere presumptions could not be sustained and there must be something more than mere suspicion to support the assessment as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. V/s CIT (26 ITR 775). The assessment should not be ITA Nos.199to202/Ind/2019 Ashish Chhaparia(others) vs. ITO Asst.Years –2011-12…

M/S Everfine Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3129/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…thout referring to the actual entity involved. Therefore, conclusions drawn against the assessee company merely on surmises and suspicion cannot take place of proof in such matters. In this regard, he relied on the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC). Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Devesh Agarwal [2017] 81 taxmann.com 257 (Bom.) who held in favour of the assessee in similar context of allegation of unexplained investment in shares in excess of what is shown in the regular books where no positive evidence was brought o…

DCIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Kunireddi Srinivas, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in above terms

ITA 313/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Kunireddi Srinivas, Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Amapk 0271H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao Date Of Hearing: 12/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner of Vs Kunireddi Srinivas, Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN – AMAPK 0271H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao Date of hearing: 12/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 15/09/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against CIT(A) - 3, Hyderabad’s order dated 09/12/2016 for AY 2…

Brace Iron & Steel P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

ITA 8617/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Lakshya Budhira, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR

…ed Salt vs., CIT reported in [1959] 37 ITR 151 [SC] Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 2. [SC] Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs., CIT reported in [1959] 3. 37 ITR 271 [SC] Judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs., Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. 4. Limited in ITA.No.270 of 1999 vide Judgment Dated 07.10.2013. 7.6.18. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the A.0. has arrived at this conclusion, without considering that SCBL arrangements are in fact a 56 ITA.No.8617/Del./201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Et Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3563/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Et Infra Developers Pvt. Tax, Ltd. Central Circle-28, Room E-9, Panchsheel Park, No.317, Ara Centre, New Delhi-110017 Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aacce3646D Revenue Assessee Cross Objection No.277/Del/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3563/Del/2016) [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Et Infra Developers Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, E-9, Panchsheel Park, Central Circle-28, Room New Delhi-110017 No.317, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aacce3646D Assessee Revenue Revenue By Sh. Satpal Gulati Cit-Dr Assessee By Sh. M.P. Rastogi, Advocate

Section 132Section 153A

…1IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘A’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2011-12] Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s ET Infra Developers Pvt. Tax, Ltd. Central Circle-28, Room E-9, Panchsheel Park, No.317, ARA Centre, New Delhi-110017 Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055 PAN-AACCE3646D Revenue Assessee Cross Objection No.277/Del/2016 (Arising out of ITA No.3563/DEL/2016) [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/s ET Infra Developers Pvt. Dy. Commissioner of Income Ltd. Tax, E-9, Panchsheel Park, Central Circle-28,…

Darshan Kumar Pahwa, Indore vs. DCIT Circle5(1), Indore

ITA 987/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Manish Govind Agrawal HUF, Indore vs. I T O 2(1), Indore

ITA 61/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Govind Harinarayan Agrawal HUF, Indore vs. I T O 2(1), Indore

ITA 60/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Sapan Shah, Indore vs. ACIT-4(I), Indore

ITA 474/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Prayank Jain, Indore vs. ACIT5(1), Indore

ITA 206/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Shiv Narayan Sharma, Indore vs. ACIT Circle 3(1), Indore

ITA 889/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…d legal proposition that there may be something more than bare suspicion, to support the findings, in the assessment order, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of – a. Omar Salav Mohamed Sait – [1959] 37 ITR 151 b. Umacharan Shah & Bros – [1959] 37 ITR 271 15. In the instant case, Sunrise Asian Limited (the amalgamated company) is neither included in the list of Shell Companies nor has been struck off from the…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 25/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…ITAT, Pune in the case Anil NandkishoreGoyal, Jalna v. assessee, ITA No.1256/PN/2012 ii) ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Acchyalal Shaw vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA No.1977/Kol/2008 iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT, (1959) 37 ITR 271 iv) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. LTd, 5604 of 2010 v) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Interseas, ITA No.77 of 2009 vi) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Vipin Bhimraj Shah vs. ACIT, ITA No.6381 of 2014 vii) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT vs. Shri Rajeev G Kalathil, ITA No.6727 of…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 24/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…ITAT, Pune in the case Anil NandkishoreGoyal, Jalna v. assessee, ITA No.1256/PN/2012 ii) ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Acchyalal Shaw vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA No.1977/Kol/2008 iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT, (1959) 37 ITR 271 iv) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. LTd, 5604 of 2010 v) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Interseas, ITA No.77 of 2009 vi) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Vipin Bhimraj Shah vs. ACIT, ITA No.6381 of 2014 vii) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT vs. Shri Rajeev G Kalathil, ITA No.6727 of…

Bgr Energy Systems Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 23/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…ITAT, Pune in the case Anil NandkishoreGoyal, Jalna v. assessee, ITA No.1256/PN/2012 ii) ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Acchyalal Shaw vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA No.1977/Kol/2008 iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT, (1959) 37 ITR 271 iv) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. LTd, 5604 of 2010 v) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Interseas, ITA No.77 of 2009 vi) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Vipin Bhimraj Shah vs. ACIT, ITA No.6381 of 2014 vii) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT vs. Shri Rajeev G Kalathil, ITA No.6727 of…

ACIT Central Circle 3 (1), Chennai vs. Smt Sasikala Raghupathy L/H of Late B G Raghupathy, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee for all assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1512/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Chennai23 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 23, 24, 25 & 116/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems The Acit, Ltd., V. Central Circle 3(1), Guna Complex 443, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 118. Pan: Aabcg 2202J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, Central Circle 3(1), V. (L/H Of Late B.G. Chennai -34. Raghupathy) New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Co Nos.: 97, 98 & 99/Chny/2018 (In Ita Nos.1510, 1511 & 1512/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, The Acit, (L/H Of Late B.G. V. Central Circle 3(1), Raghupathy) Chennai -34. New No.60, Old No.100, Iv Street, Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aafpr 5779J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT

…ITAT, Pune in the case Anil NandkishoreGoyal, Jalna v. assessee, ITA No.1256/PN/2012 ii) ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Acchyalal Shaw vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA No.1977/Kol/2008 iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT, (1959) 37 ITR 271 iv) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. LTd, 5604 of 2010 v) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Interseas, ITA No.77 of 2009 vi) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Vipin Bhimraj Shah vs. ACIT, ITA No.6381 of 2014 vii) ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT vs. Shri Rajeev G Kalathil, ITA No.6727 of…