M/S POORNACHAND AGRAWAL, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations
ITA 104/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19
Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 104/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Pooranchand Agrawal C/O. Bagadia Enterprises, Near Shiv Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495001 Pan : Aaifp8483G
For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263
Property Invest.(P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 51 taxman. Com 387 (SC), and even Gujrat High Court in case of Umesh Krishnani Vs. ITO (2013) 35 Taxman 598 (Gujarat). Earlier, in the case of CIT v Mohanakala(P)(2007)161Taxman 169/291 ITR 278 (SC), while considering the scope of section 68, appex court observed as under
