Addition need to be deleted or assessment need to be quashed if it is based on statement of a witness and assessee is not offered opportunity of cross-examination.

Loading

Addition need to be deleted or assessment need to be quashed if it is based on statement of a witness and assessee is not offered opportunity of cross-examination.

Hon’ble Apex Court in Andaman TimberIndustries case has held that the addition need to be deleted, or assessment need to be quashed if it is based on statement of a witness and assessee is not offered opportunity of cross-examination.
 
 
 
Here is a list of judgement wherein the same view was affirmed.

Amitabh Bansal v. ITO [2019] 102 taxmann.com 229/175 ITD 401 (Delhi – Trib.); Pratik Suryakant Shah v. ITO [2017] 77 taxmann.com 260 (Ahd. – Trib.); Smt. Madhu Killa v. Asstt. CIT [2018] 100 taxmann.com 264 (Kol. – Trib.); Ramprasad Agarwal v. ITO [2018] 100 taxmann.com 172/[2019] 174 ITD 286 (Mum. – Trib.); H.R. Mehta v. Asstt. CIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 110 (Bom.); Meghraj Singh Shekhawat v. Dy. CIT [2019] 103 taxmann.com 374/175 ITD 693 (Jp. – Trib.); CCE v. Shyam Traders 2016 (333) ELT 389 (All.); P.R. Rolling Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 185 (Jp. – Trib.); Fateh Chand Charitable Trust v. CIT [2017] 83 taxmann.com 33 (Luck. – Trib.); ITO v. Karsan Nandu [2017] 77 taxmann.com 275 (Mum. – Trib.); ITO v. Softline Creations (P.) Ltd. [2017] 81 taxmann.com 139 (Delhi – Trib.); Mohan Meakin Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2017] 87 taxmann.com 171 (Delhi – Trib.); Fancy Wear v. ITO [2017] 87 taxmann.com 183 (Mum. – Trib.); Pavitra Realcon (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2017] 87 taxmann.com 142 (Delhi – Trib.); Apeejay Education Society v. Asstt. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 289 (Asr. – Trib.); ITO v. Shreedham Construction Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 2948/Mum/2017]; Pr. CIT v. Kanubhai Maganlal Patel [2017] 79 taxmann.com 257 (Guj.); Obulapuram Mining Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 73 /160 ITD 224 (Bang. – Trib.)

Menu