How many judgments cite Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT?

193 judgments on BharatTax cite Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT (45 ITR 206), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 153C, Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 144B.

Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT

45 ITR 206Supreme Court of India1962#487 most cited

What is Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT authority for?

The Income Tax Officer (ITO) can gather material for assessment through private enquiries but must disclose such material to the assessee and provide an opportunity to explain it to uphold the principles of natural justice. The ITO is not bound by strict rules of evidence and can use material collected privately, provided disclosure and explanation are afforded.

193

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT · 45 ITR 206 · SC · private enquiry · disclosure of material · opportunity to explain · natural justice · cross-examination

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 153C Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 250 Section 132

Issues it is cited on

buyback of shares retention money onus of proof section 269t section 158bb section 269s third party information section 271e icds dumb documents section 132(4a)section 292c

Judgments citing Vasantlal & Co. v. CIT

Shri Rajiv Bothra, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5-2, Ncrb, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 557/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 557/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 Rajiv Bothra, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. B-252, Janta Colony, Ward 5(2), Jaipur. Ncrb, Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aazpr 2080 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Written Submissions Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 28/09/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jaipur Dated 19/03/2019 For The A.Y. 2013-14, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred At Law As Well As On Facts In Invoking Provisions Of Section 145 For Confirming The Addition Made When The Assessing Officer Had Made The Trading Additions Without Invoking Provisions Of Section 145. 2. That The Ld. A.O. Had Erred At Law As Well As On Facts In Arbitrarily Treating Purchases Made From Maximus Gems, Surya Diam & Navkar India Of Rs. 71,32,000/-, Rs. 10,09,250/- & Rs. 9,01,600/- Respectively In Total Of Rs. 90,42,850/- Are Non-Verifiable Purchases & The Ld. Cit(A) Also Erred In Confirming That The Purchases Made From These Parties Are Non-Verifiable.

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 557/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 Rajiv Bothra, cuke I.T.O., Vs. B-252, Janta Colony, Ward 5(2), Jaipur. NCRB, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAZPR 2080 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Written Submissions jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.CIT) lquokb…

Shri Sandeep Sharma, Aa5, Anita Colony, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 1275/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. K. C. Gupta (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tc. The relied upon details were provided from time to time to the Ld. A/R during the course of hearing and the modus operandi was discussed in detail. The Ld. A/R was also made aware of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case C Vasantlal & Co. V/s CIT 45 ITR 206(SC) (3 Judge Bench) wherein the Apex court had observed that "...the ITO is not bound by any technical rules of the law of evidence. It is open to him to collect material to facilitate assessment even by private enquiry. But, if he desires to use the material so collected, the assessee must be informed about the material and given adequate opportu…

ACIT CC-4, Thane vs. M/S.Hallmark Developers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in

ITA 1381/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ramlal Negiacit, Central Circle-4, Vs. M/S. Hallmark Developers Thane No. 149/150, Tara Castle, Masoli, Dahanu Road, Dahanu, Mumbai- 401501 Pan/Gir No. Aadfh3619M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S. Hallmark Developers Vs. Jcit, Palghar Range, No. 149/150, Tara Castle, Masoli, Palghar. Dahanu Road, Dahanu, Mumbai- 401501 Pan/Gir No. Aadfh3619M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…te and settled position of law that one cannot make additions unless and until the materials on which reliance is sought to be placed is confronted to the concerned person as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C. Vasantlal & Co . v CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206(SC). The fact that M/s Metcon India has been give work after due diligence and tender process cannot be ignored. The confirmations of vendor of land M/s MSHCL and the purchaser of land M/s NPPL is also cannot be ignored. From the above, it is undoubtedly proved that the assessee had undertaken land development work. We, therefore, are of the co…

Amit Mafatlal Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 19 (1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5793/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 5793/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2015-16) Shri Amit Mafatlal Shah The Asst. Commissioner Of 78/80 Gora Gandhi Building, Income Tax, Circle 19(1), बनाम/ Cp Tank Road, C.P. Tank Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 004 (अपीलाथ" / Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aabps5009A अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Michael Jerald, Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25.02.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 20.04.2020

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald, DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 274Section 68

…T (1944) 12 ITR 393 5. Jai Karan Sharma vs. DCIT (2012) 23 taxmannc.com 300 (Delhi) 6. Hamish Engineering Industries (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2009) 120 ITD 166 (Mum. Trib.) 7. Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT (1980) 4 Taxman 29 (SC) 8. C Vasantlal & Co. vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC) 9. The Ld. A.R. finally prayed that in view of the above facts and the ratio laid down in the various decisions the assessment framed by the AO and as affirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be quashed as the same is in violation of principle of natural justice as the information was not confronted to the assessee and also that no cross examin…

M/S Patron Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-10(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1614/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal. It is settled law that suspicion, howsoever strong cannot take the place of legal proof. Consequently, no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arises for adjudication.— C. Vasantlal & Co. vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), M.O. Thomakutty vs. CIT (.1958) 34 ITR 501 (Ker)) and Mukand Singh vs. Sales Tax Tribunal (1998) 107 STC 300 (Punjab) relied on; Umacharan Shaw &Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Applied; Jaspal Singh vs. CIT (2006) 205 CTR (P & H) 624 distinguished” 25. M/s Classic Growers Ltd. vs. CIT [ITA No. 129 of 2012] (Cal HC) – “ In this case th…

Income Tax Officer 15(1)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Celebrity Lifespace Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6301/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6301/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15)

For Appellant: SinghFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Bairagra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

…rties whose statement AO is relying on particularly the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries V. CIT, 281 CTR 241 along with following decisions. 1. H.R. Metha Vs. ACIT, 387 ITR 561 (Bom HC) 2. C Vasantlal & co. Vs. CIT, 45 ITR 206 (SC) 3. Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. CIT, 125 ITR 713 (SC) 4. CIT Vs. Ashish International, ITA No. 4299 of 2009. 5. CIT Vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Bom) 6.3 It was contented by Ld. AR that in the statement of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt, he has replied regarding unsecured loans to only one party M/s Moraj Building concepts Pvt Ltd., and he has now…

ITO 12(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Krish Micro System Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6132/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Income-Tax Officer Vs M/S Krish Micro System Pvt Ltd Ward 12(3)(1), Mumbai 204, Spring Leaf Chsl, Lokhandwala, Kandivali (E) Mumbai400 101 Pan : Aacck6090R Appellant Respondednt

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…settled law that strict rules of evidence do not apply to I.T Act and 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. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 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 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). (ix) The purchases from hawala operator…

ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur vs. M/S Nandlal Enterprises, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 437/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &

Section 194CSection 40

…sessee, nor the appellant was given any opportunity to cross examine the same. Thus the so called Ex-party evidence cannot help the case of the Department. The assessee has relied upon the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of C. Vasantlal and Co. Vs. CIT (45 ITR 206, 209) (SC) in which it was held that: "It is open to the AO to collect material to facilitate assessment even by the Private enquiry but as pointed out by the Supreme Court that if he desires to use the material so collected the assessee must be informed what material, is called and must be given adequate opportunity of explaining it. And that it…

ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur vs. M/S Nandlal Enterprises, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 436/NAG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &

Section 194CSection 40

ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur vs. M/S Nandlal Enterprises, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 435/NAG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &

Section 194CSection 40

Shri Puneet Jain, Meerut vs. ITO, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1569/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampat, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Suleka Verma, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 44A

…al principle is that the Assessing Officer must confront the assessee with materials relied upon by him for assessment. This sacrosanct principle has stood over the years. The authorities postulating the dictum are – 8. a) C. Vasant Lai & Co., Vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC) b) Kishan Chand Cheiia Ram vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) c) Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 d) CIT vs. SMC Share Brokers Ltd. (2007) 288 ITR 345 e) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwai (2015) 379 ITR 367 (Del) f) CIT vs. Ansal Properties & Industries (order annexed) g) CIT vs. Trans Asia Securities Pvt. Ltd. (order annexed) h) CIT vs. Andaman Timber…

Karan Shanti Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 223/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna (JCIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tc. The relied upon details were provided from time to time to the Ld. A/R during the course of hearing and the modus operandi was discussed in detail. The Ld. A/R was also made aware of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case C Vasantlal & Co. V/s CIT 45 ITR 206(SC) (3 Judge Bench) wherein the Apex court had observed that "...the ITO is not bound by any 8 Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur. technical rules of the law of evidence. It is open to him to collect material to facilitate assessment even by private enquiry. But, if he desires to use the material so collected, the assessee must be informed about the mat…

Anita Rinku Patodia, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1913/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1913/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) Smt. Anita Rinku Patodia Acit-Central Circle-3(2) बनाम/ 605, Business Classic Mumbai. Chincholi Bunder Road Vs. Malad (W), Mumbai-400 064. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akrpp-7593-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar- Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. By Way Of This Appeal For Assessment Year 2007-08, The Assessee Has Challenged The Quantum Addition Of Rs.90 Lacs Made U/S 68 By Learned Assessing Officer While Framing Assessment U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 16/03/2015. The Additions Have Already Been Confirmed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No. Cit(A)-51/It 82/2015-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar- Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…Kachwal Gems V/s CIT (2007) 288 ITR 10(SC), wherein it was held that mere payments by account payee cheques is not sacrosanct and is not sufficient to establish the genuineness of the transaction. Further, reliance is placed on C Vasantilal Co V/s CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206(SC), Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and Sumati Dayal Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) wherein it has been held that even strict rules of evidence do not apply to the proceedings under the Income Tax Act and the real test with regard to genuineness of the transaction is "Preponderance of probabilities" and not 'beyond reasonable doubt'. It is an undi…

Narangs International Hotels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee appeal in ITA no

ITA 1383/MUM/2013[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2019AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

…her submitted that the above proposition of law was fully supported by the decisions of the Courts and were rightly applied by the first appellate authority, and that the appellant's case is fully supported by the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case in 45 ITR 206(SC), 49 ITR 112(SC) and 159 ITR 78(SC). The appellant therefore, submitted that the Asstt. Order is ab-initio, void and illegal and is liable to be cancelled”. 11. However, learned CIT(A) dismissed the same summarily by holding as under :- “ii) I do not agree with the submissions of the appellant, as on similar ground the CIT(A) vide order dated…

Mrs. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 708/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 51Section 68

…emerging is that when an adverse view is to be drawn on the basis of statement of a third party, the person affected should be afforded an opportunity to rebut such statement and cross examination if asked for. The supreme court in case of C. Vasantlal & Co. (45 ITR 206) has held that "it was open to the income-tax officer to collect materials to facilitate assessment by private inquiries. But if be desires to use the material so collected, assessee must be informed of the material and must be given an adequate opportunity to explain it." In the present case it is seen that after the statement of Mr. Pravin Agarw…

Pushpa Nareshkumar Dhanania, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 17(2)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 2569/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer Smt. Pushpa Nareshkumar Dhanania V. 24, Saraswati Sadan Ward No. 17(2)(5) 1St Floor, 113 Keshavji Naik Road Mumbai Fort, Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Adwpd 7778 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Haresh P. Shah Department By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ll-settled law that strict rules of evidence do not apply to I.T Act and 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. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 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 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). 4 Smt. Pushpa Nareshkumar Dhanania However…

P Mittal Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6906/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Anmol Sinha, Adv. & Sh. AshviniFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

…of the assessee. Further the group has categorically admitted to providing of accommodation entries of unsecured loans through various benami concerns.” The AO further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C. Vasantlal & Co. Vs. CIT 45 ITR 206(SC) and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Rameshwarlal Mali vs. CIT 256 ITR 536(Raj.) among others. In this regard, it was submitted by the assessee that if the entries and material are gathered behind the back of the assessee and if the AO proposes to act on such material as he might have gathered as a result of his private enquiries, he mu…

Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 223/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 May 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna (JCIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tc. The relied upon details were provided from time to time to the Ld. A/R during the course of hearing and the modus operandi was discussed in detail. The Ld. A/R was also made aware of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case C Vasantlal & Co. V/s CIT 45 ITR 206(SC) (3 Judge Bench) wherein the Apex court had observed that "...the ITO is not bound by any 8 Shri Sandeep Sharma, Jaipur. technical rules of the law of evidence. It is open to him to collect material to facilitate assessment even by private enquiry. But, if he desires to use the material so collected, the assessee must be informed about the mat…

Rohit Jalan, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2205/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal. It is settled law that suspicion, howsoever strong cannot take the place of legal proof. Consequently, no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arises for adjudication.— C. Vasantlal & Co. vs. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), M.O. Thomakutty vs. CIT (.1958) 34 ITR 501 (Ker)) and Mukand Singh vs. Sales Tax Tribunal (1998) 107 STC 300 (Punjab) relied on; Umacharan Shaw &Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Applied; Jaspal Singh vs. CIT (2006) 205 CTR (P & H) 624 distinguished” 30. The Co-ordinate Bench of Ahmedabad in ITA Nos. 501 & 502/Ahd/2016 had the occasion t…

ITO 1(1)(1)(5), Agra vs. Shanti Constructions, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue is dismissed

ITA 289/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaincome Tax Officer, Ward,1(1)(5), Vs.. M/S Shanti Constructions, Ug-13, Aayakar Bhawan, Agra Shanti Madhuvan Plaza, Delhi Gate, Agra (Appellant) (Pan: Aaufs3185N) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep K. Sahgal, Adv. & Sh. Utsav Sahgal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Bajpai CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…d also given an opportunity to the assessee to explain those passages and to adduce evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C. Vasantlal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (1962) 45 ITR 206 has held that “if ITO desires to use the material so collected to facilitate assessment from private enquiry, the assessee must be informed of the material and must be given an adequate opportunity of explaining it.” The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Capricorn Shopping Complex Vs. Income Tax Officer reported in (1996) 218 ITR 721 has he…