{"id":59593,"date":"2026-04-17T12:21:00","date_gmt":"2026-04-17T06:51:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-306-taxman-339-sc-editorial-shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-173-taxmann-com-955-pat-hc\/"},"modified":"2026-04-17T12:21:00","modified_gmt":"2026-04-17T06:51:00","slug":"shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-306-taxman-339-sc-editorial-shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-173-taxmann-com-955-pat-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-306-taxman-339-sc-editorial-shree-shakambhari-udyog-partnership-firm-v-cit-2025-173-taxmann-com-955-pat-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Shree Shakambhari Udyog Partnership Firm v. CIT (2025) 306 Taxman 339 (SC) Editorial: Shree Shakambhari Udyog Partnership Firm v. CIT (2025) 173 taxmann.com 955 (Pat) (HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The reassessment notice was issued on the basis of a\u00a0<strong>complaint received from one of the partners<\/strong><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>of the assessee firm, alleging that the firm had\u00a0<strong>understated its actual business receipts<\/strong>\u00a0with an intent to defraud the Revenue. Based on the information received and the replies furnished by the assessee, the\u00a0AO <strong>passed the reassessment order<\/strong><strong>, <\/strong>making additions to the income of the assessee.<\/p>\n<p>The assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings on the ground that they were based on\u00a0<strong>third-party information<\/strong>, namely the complaint, and that\u00a0<strong>no opportunity of cross-examination<\/strong><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>of the complainant had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>The Court noted that the AO had\u00a0<strong>not recorded any statement of the complainant or any other witness<\/strong><strong>,<\/strong> nor was the reassessment order passed solely on the basis of the complaint. Instead, the Assessing Officer had examined the\u00a0<strong>documentary material evidencing the firm\u2019s transactions<\/strong><strong>,<\/strong> all of which had been made available to the assessee. The assessee was also afforded\u00a0an <strong>adequate opportunity<\/strong>\u00a0to explain and substantiate how the alleged undisclosed sales were accounted for in the books of account. The Court held that, sitting in\u00a0<strong>writ jurisdiction<\/strong>, it could not undertake an appreciation or analysis of factual material and documentary evidence. Accordingly, no jurisdictional error was found in the reassessment proceedings. The\u00a0<strong>writ petition was dismissed<\/strong><strong>,<\/strong> with liberty granted to the assessee to\u00a0<strong>avail the alternate statutory remedy by way of appeal<\/strong><strong>.<\/strong>SLP of assessee dismissed.<strong>\u00a0 (<\/strong>AY.2016-17, 2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147: Reassessment-Unexplained money-Unaccounted sales-Information from Partner\u2019s Complaint-Opportunity of Hearing-No Reliance Solely on Third-Party-Writ not maintainable-SLP of assessee dismissed. [S.69A,  148, Art. 136] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59593","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fvb","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59593","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=59593"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59593\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59594,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59593\/revisions\/59594"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59593"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59593"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59593"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}