This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
AO Didn’t Enquire, CIT(A) Did; Ad-Hoc Additions Crumble; Proper Evidence Beats Estimate
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- ACIT Vs Chitavalasah Jute Mills Ltd (ITAT Agra)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2012-13
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
ACIT Vs Chitavalasah Jute Mills Ltd (ITAT Agra)
Assessee’s return for AY 2012-13 was assessed ex-parte u/s 144 r.w.s.143(3) with large ad-hoc additions-40% disallowance of sundry creditors Rs.11,90,27,242, disallowance of interest Rs.99,69,661, depreciation Rs.67,84,622 & other expenses Rs.12,76,916.
In the first round Tribunal remanded matter to CIT(A) to examine additional evidence. In the second round Assessee furnished complete ledgers, schedules & explanations; AO, during remand, merely objected to admission of evidence without making any enquiry though notices were issued o...






