Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 342 (0.57 seconds)
Documents citing Acit vs Smt. Pushpa Devi Jain [Alongwith Ita ... on 28 December, 2004

Acit-26(2), Mumbai vs Smt. Pushpa Madan Sharma, Mumbai on 21 September, 2021

16. The revenue being aggrieved with the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. Admittedly, the fact that the assessee had failed to substantiate the veracity of the impugned purchases that were claimed to have been made from the aforementioned tainted party viz. M/s Anil Trading Company is not in dispute. Although, the assessee had failed to substantiate the authenticity of the impugned purchases to the satisfaction of the A.O, but we cannot remain oblivious of the fact that certain supporting documentary evidences coupled with the fact that the payment to the aforementioned parties were made by the assessee through account payee cheques had not been dislodged till date by the lower authorities. Be that as it may, in our considered view, now when the fact that the impugned purchases formed part of the sales/contract receipts of the assessee had not been ITA No. 1526 &1527/Mum/2020 A.Y. 2010-11 12 ACIT Vs. Smt. Pushpa Madan Sharma dislodged by the A.O, therefore, it can safely be gathered that the assessee had procured the impugned material not from the aforementioned hawala parties but from the open/grey market. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the observations of the CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by him that the addition qua the impugned purchases claimed by the assessee to have been made from the aforementioned party was liable to be restricted only to the extent of the profit which the assessee would have made by procuring such goods at a discounted value from the open/grey market. Insofar the quantification of the aforesaid profit element is concerned, we are of the considered view that the CIT(A) had taken the GP rate of the assessee for the last eight years i.e. AY 2007-08 to AY 2014-15 of 15.88% as a yardstick and on the said reasoned basis restricted the addition to 15% of the value of the impugned bogus purchases of Rs. 2,12,513/-. Accordingly, backed by our aforesaid deliberations we find no merit in the appeal of the revenue and dismiss the same. The Grounds of appeal A to G are dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Ms. Preeti Jain, New Delhi vs Acit, New Delhi on 20 February, 2018

The assessee has also submitted the quantitative details which could not be shown to be concocted. No defect could be pointed out in such quantity details. Further, the details of jewellery recorded on approval and sent on approval is supported by the documents produced before the ld AO. The ld AO did not find any discrepancy in those details. Further, the valuation of jewellery made by the assessee on cost basis was also not disputed contrarily the cost of the jewellery was supported with the bills showing ACIT Vs. Preeti Jain, ITA No. 1124/Del/2015 & CO No. 154/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) rates of purchases. Merely non maintenance of stock register by the assessee cannot result into addition unless the ld AO shows with conclusive evidence that quantitative details submitted by the assessee is incorrect. Admittedly the assessee has produced the books of account before the ld AO and DDI, no defects were pointed out therein. Therefore, merely because books were not produced at the time of search, such addition cannot be made. Thus, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld CIT(A)( in deleting the impugned addition of Rs. 1510389/- made by the ld AO as undisclosed investment. In view of this ground No. 1 to 3 of the appeal of the revenue are dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The Acit, Kheda Circle, Nadiad vs M/S. Asian Food Industries,, Nadiad on 28 January, 2019

6. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) taking into consideration the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench and also judgment passed -8- ITA No.277/Ahd/2016 The ACIT vs. Asian Food Industries Asst.Year - 2012-13 by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court as mentioned therein. Hence, having no infirmity found in the order passed by the Learned CIT(A), we confirm the same.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

The Acit, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs M/S. Gujarat State Road Transport ... on 25 July, 2019

ACIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Asst.Years - 2013-14 -5- Since the learned DR could not point out any difference in the facts in the present year, we do not find any reason to take a contrary view in the present year, and hence, we decline to interfere with order of the CIT(A) on this issue and the ground of the appeal of the Revenue is rejected and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Rameshkumar S.Padia, Bhavnagar vs Department Of Income Tax on 7 October, 2010

The source of acquisition of gifted property was identified to be directly connected with the donor who had subscribed the Bonds in US dollars paid from his bank account outside India. The occasion of gift was explained and in the above context, all the ingredients of the transactions were established. It would appear that but for the unfortunate demise of the donor, appellant would have produced him for verification by the Assessing Officer. The deficiencies or defects noticed by the Assessing Officer in respect of the Bonds are not affecting the ITA No.2756/Ahd/2007 ACIT vs. Shri Rameshkumar S.Padia Asst.Year - 2004-05 -6- genuineness of the transaction at all. I am of the view that the appellant had clearly established the identity of the donor, his creditworthiness and also genuineness of the transaction. Accordingly, I hold that the gift is liable to be accepted. The alternate argument of the appellant is that the income accruing to him by way of gift was exempt from tax as per the terms of the Resurgent India Bonds. This argument is also found to be correct. Accordingly, Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition. The ground raised is allowed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rajesh Dhirubhai Patel, , Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax on 10 February, 2016

"3.4. I have considered the penalty order, assessment order and the submissions made by the appellant. A perusal of the order u/s.143(3) shows that the addition of Rs.42,28,700/- was made by the AO on ITA No.2851 /Ahd/2015 ACIT vs. Shri Rajesh Dhirubhai Patel Asst.Year - 2009-10 -4- account of the deeming provisions of Section 50C of the I.T.Act. All the details regarding sale of land had been produced by the appellant before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. The addition on account f capital gains was made only on account of provision of section 50C whereby the AO took the value of the property at Rs.1,07,78,700/- instead of Rs.65,50,000/- as per the sale deed submitted by the appellant. Section 271(1)(c) of the I T Act states as under:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next