Hinaben Babulal Pipaliya vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(1), Rajkot

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The case involves two appeals filed by the assessee, Hinaben Babulal Pipaliya, against orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appeals pertain to assessment years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The assessee's counsel argued that a search and survey operation was conducted by the office of DDIT (Inv.) Unit-1, Rajkot, covering 43 premises of real estate builders and their associates. The assessee claimed that the seized material was not provided to them and that they were not given an opportunity for cross-examination. The revenue did not object to the matter being restored to the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for further adjudication.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the seized material should be provided to the assessee and an opportunity for cross-examination should be granted?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• DCIT vs. Danaram Jivaram Choudhary

  Ahmedabad bench

• Shri Brijesh Kumar Verma vs. DCIT

  Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi benchAY 2016-17 and 2017-18Allowed

• M/s. Adam Smith Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Central Circle 05

  Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• N J Gears, Mahavir Engineering Works, and Virjibhai Jerambhai Patel vs. ITO Ward 3(1)(1) Rajkot, ITO Ward 1(1)(1) Rajkot, and ITO Ward 1(2)(2) Rajkot

  Rajkot bench

• Arvind Khetaram Purohit vs DCIT Central Circle

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2017-18 & 2018-19Allowed

• The DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai v. Rajamani Gobinath