Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal partially allows departmental appeal, upholds deletion of additions under section 69B and sale of gold dust.</h1> <h3>Income-Tax Officer. Versus Manindra Nath Dutta.</h3> Income-Tax Officer. Versus Manindra Nath Dutta. - ITD 054, 685, Issues Involved:1. Cancellation of the assessment order made under section 144.2. Admission of additional ground of appeal without giving reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer.3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 1,22,500 assessed under section 69B of the I.T. Act, 1961.4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 20,000 on account of sale of gold dust.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Cancellation of the assessment order made under section 144:The CIT (Appeals) cancelled the assessment order made under section 144 on the grounds that the assessment was made on a deceased person, Sri M.N. Dutta, and not on his legal heir, Smt. Dolly Dutta. The CIT(A) admitted an additional ground of appeal stating that the assessment was null and void as notices were served on the deceased. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to consider that the return was filed by the legal representative and that notices were duly served and complied with by the legal representative. The Tribunal held that the provisions of section 159 and section 292B of the IT Act, 1961, were applicable, which allow for the assessment to be made through the legal representative, and any clerical errors in the notices do not invalidate the assessment. Consequently, the Tribunal vacated the CIT(A)'s order and restored the assessment order.2. Admission of additional ground of appeal without giving reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer:The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) admitted the additional ground of appeal without giving the Assessing Officer (AO) a reasonable opportunity to respond, which is against the provisions of section 250(5) of the IT Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the omission of the additional ground from the form of appeal was wilful or unreasonable, as the legal representative was aware of the facts. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the admission of the additional ground was illegal and could not be sustained.3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 1,22,500 assessed under section 69B of the I.T. Act, 1961:The AO had added Rs. 1,22,500 under section 69B, being the value of 500 grams of imprest gold, due to the lack of explanation in the accounts filed. The CIT(A) deleted this addition on the grounds that the assessment was null and void and that no addition was warranted as per a similar case, Sri Sukumar Dutta. The Tribunal, while vacating the CIT(A)'s order on the nullity of the assessment, upheld the deletion of the addition based on the reasoning provided in the case of Sri Sukumar Dutta, where no addition was called for when the assessment year was not the first year of business.4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 20,000 on account of sale of gold dust:The AO had added Rs. 20,000 on account of the sale of gold dust due to the lack of explanation. The CIT(A) deleted this addition on the same grounds as the previous issue. The Tribunal, while vacating the CIT(A)'s order on the nullity of the assessment, upheld the deletion of the addition based on the reasoning provided in the case of Sri Sukumar Dutta, where no addition was warranted on account of the estimated sale of gold dust.Conclusion:The Tribunal partly allowed the departmental appeal, vacating the CIT(A)'s order regarding the cancellation of the assessment and the admission of the additional ground of appeal, but upheld the deletion of the additions under section 69B and on account of the sale of gold dust based on the precedent set in the case of Sri Sukumar Dutta.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found