← All Phrases

“Section 142(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 142Section 142(3)111 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 142(3) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 142(3)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

Judgments citing Section 142(3)

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9356/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both ... back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred both on facts

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9355/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both ... back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred both on facts

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9284/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both ... back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred both on facts

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1519/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

with listing requirements of the stock exchange so as to conclude on an adverse finding recorded by the authorities below. 8.5. Also, under section 142(3), it is incumbent upon the ld. AO to give an opportunity of being heard in respect of any material gathered by him and proposed ... made u/s 144 which is not so in the present appeal before us. In the present case before us, requirement mandated by section 142(3) has not been complied with by the ld. AO in completing the impugned assessment. 8.6. On careful reading of the show cause notice issued

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1518/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

with listing requirements of the stock exchange so as to conclude on an adverse finding recorded by the authorities below. 8.5. Also, under section 142(3), it is incumbent upon the ld. AO to give an opportunity of being heard in respect of any material gathered by him and proposed ... made u/s 144 which is not so in the present appeal before us. In the present case before us, requirement mandated by section 142(3) has not been complied with by the ld. AO in completing the impugned assessment. 8.6. On careful reading of the show cause notice issued

M/S. Dharti Engineers, Amreli vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 198/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 198/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) M/S. Dharti Engineers The Pcit-1 बनाम/ Sardar Nagar Street No.1, Rajkot Vs. Chakkargadh Road,Amreli - 365601 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8555E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing 22/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 29/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.01.2022 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Rajkot (In Short ‘The Pcit’) Holding The Assessment Order Dated 10.12.2019 Passed By The Dc/Acit, Cir-3(1), Rkt Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As To ‘The Act’) Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Setting Aside The Issue To The File Of The Ld. Ao With A Direction Upon Him To Pass A Fresh Assessment Only To The Extent Of The Issues In Respect Of The Provision Of Section 40A(3) Of The Act With Proper Enquiry & Verification Of The Claim & Its Genuineness For A.Y. 2017-18. Ita No. 198/Rjt/2022 (M/S. Dharti. Engineers Vs. Pcit) A. Y. 2017-18 - 2- 2. The Short Fact Leading To The Case Is This That The Assessee By Paying Huge Cash In Excess Of Rs.20,000/- Alleged To Have Violated The Provision Of Section 40A(3) Of The Act. The Details Whereof Has Been Reproduced In The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) In The Following Manner:

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the Ld. PCIT holding the order passed by the Ld. AO dated 10.12.2019 under Section 142(3) of the Act erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. ITA No. 198/Rjt/2022 (M/s. Dharti. Engineers vs. PCIT

ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1949/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-14, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1026/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 884/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 883/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9618/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9617/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9616/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9615/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee to rebut the same in ITA Nos. 883 & 884/Del/2020 ITA Nos. 1026 & 1949/Del/2021 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned A.O. is bad both

Aruna Tiwari, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur

ITA 90/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 90/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Aruna Tiwari 762, Sundar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt4977B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Raipur. Thus, the assessee is not entitled to call in question the jurisdiction as per provision of section 142(3) of the Act. For sake of convenience, the said section is reproduced below:- "Section: 124(3) No person shall be entitled to call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing ... entitled to call in satisfied that he had no jurisdiction question the jurisdiction as per provision of over the case hence, admittedly he section 142(3) of the Act.... himself transferred the assessment In the present case, the assessee has not case to Jurisdictional Assessing Officer raised objection in respect

Aj Energy Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1190/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manvendra Goel, CIT(DR)
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

back of the assessee, without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same in violation of statutory provision of section 142(3) of the Act. 8. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in passing

Hitesh Kumar Bindal, Ratlam vs. The DCIT Circle 1(1), Indore

ITA 206/IND/2022[A.Y- 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Hitesh Kumar Bindal Dcit-1(1) Swastik House, 21/3 Indore बनाम/ Ratlam Kothi Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aggpb9228H Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri Vijay Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2023

Section 10(38)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

completing the assessment by making the addition of Rs. 1,46,88,259/- without providing the material gathered within the meaning of section 142(3).” 5. Ld. AR relied upon decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Company Ltd. Vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) and National ... submissions. Page 2 of 7 Hitesh Kumar Bindal Assessment year 2014-15 6. Since the impugned additional ground raises a legal issue involving section 142(3) of the act which goes to the root of matter, we firstly adjudicate this ground. The assessee’s claim in this ground is such

M/S. Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rourkla vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 109/CTK/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.31 To 33/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 To 2018-2019) M/S Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3593 P & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.34 To 39/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/Ita No.109/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2017 To 2020-2021) M/S Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Ltd., Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3594 L & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.40 To 44/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2018-2019) M/S Bajrangbali Re-Rollers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 6678 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Shri B.K. Tibrewal, Ca & Ms. Nisha Rachh, Ca Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr.Cit(Osd) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate with Shri
Section 133ASection 153ASection 292CSection 69Section 69C

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Anshuman Ramdayalji Kumawat, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 22/SRT/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in Section 142(3). This requirement is emphasized by the various decisions quoted by AR in this submission (supra). 7.1.3 Requirement of giving materials proposed to be relied

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Anshuman Ramdayalji Kumawat, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 21/SRT/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) with Shri Vinod Kumar
Section 132(4)Section 144

same ratio. Furnishing of copies of material collected by the Id. AO to the assessee is a statutory requirement as provided in Section 142(3). This requirement is emphasized by the various decisions quoted by AR in this submission (supra). 7.1.3 Requirement of giving materials proposed to be relied