Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 124 (0.92 seconds)
Documents citing Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Raj Kumar Agarwal [Alongwith Ita No. ... on 3 March, 2006

Laxmi Srijan Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward-9(3), Kolkata, Kolkata on 29 March, 2023

"8. We have heard the submissions of the learned D.R, who relied on the order of AO. The learned counsel for the assessee relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A) and further drew our attention to the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Agarwal vide ITA No. 179/2008 dated 17.11.2009 wherein the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court took a view that non-production of the director of a Public Limited Company which is regularly assessed to Income tax having PAN, on the ground that the identity of the investor is not proved cannot be sustained.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Raj Bala, Delhi vs Assessee on 27 July, 2016

AY: 2006-07 8.4 In the case of CIT Vs. Shri Raj Kumar Agarwal, decided by Hon'ble Allahabad 1 Iigh Court, Lucknow Bench, in ITA No. 179 of 2008 dated 17.11.2009, a copy of which has been placed before us by the Id. counsel, the question before the court was to the effect that-whether, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 25,05,000/-in respect of loan from Rich Capital & Financial Services Ltd., which was invested in purchase of commercial plot at Gomti Nagar, Lucknow? The assessee filed copies of confirmation letter from the company, the bank account of the company and his own bank account. The loan was returned in the same year. The AO did not accept the explanation of the assessee. He referred to the fact that cash was deposited in the account of the company before issuance of cheques to the assessee. Further, the loan was without stipulation of charging the interest. Therefore, his conclusion was that the assessee failed to discharge the onus in view of the aforesaid fact and the failure of the assessee to produce the director of the company for examination. The Hon'ble Court mentioned that the identity of the lender stands explained as it is a public limited company. The company is regularly assessed to tax and it has permanent account number. Therefore, it was concluded that the onus has been discharged by the assessee by producing necessary evidence.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, Dehradun vs M/S. Citimates Builders & Promoters (P) ... on 18 May, 2018

6. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) erred in holding that the addition u/s 68 & Section 36(1) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be made in assessment completed u/s 153A, unless some incriminating material was found during the course of search. Thus, the CIT(A) ignored provisions of law as contained in proviso (b) of sub Section 1 of Section 153A which require the A.O to assess re-assess the total income of the assessee as defined in Section 2(45) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. DR relied upon the Allahabad High 5 ITA No. 3169/Del/2015 Court decision in case of CIT Vs. Shri Raj Kumar Arora ITA No. 56/2011 order dated 11/7/2014.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 20 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next