Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.22 seconds)Sh Vibhu Aggarwal, New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 4 May, 2018
10. We also find that the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case
of Vibhu Aggarwal Vs. DCIT (2018) 93 taxmann.com 275 held as
under;
Article 300A in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Coinage Act, 2011
Section 69 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 69A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Messrs Mehta Parikh & Co vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay on 10 May, 1956
Ms. Pooja Shree Chouksey
ITA No. 572/Ind/2018
• Jewellery belonging to the assessee was found during the course of
search (680 grams approx.- 580 gms gold jewellery and 117.63 gms
diamond jewellery - pg 31 of PB)
• The Ld. AO treated the entire jewellery as unexplained investment and
made addition on account of same u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act 1961
• The assessee has filed affidavits herself as deponent and also of her 2
aunts, all stating the fact that she received jewellery as a gift from her
aunts and maternal grandmother on various occasions. (Page no. 32, 33,
34 a/the PE.) (225 gms + 175 gms + 300 gms = 700 gms aprox. Over the
years)
• None of the deponents have been discredited by the department by way
of cross examination
• If the deponent is not cross-examined by the authorities then mere
rejection of the affidavit filed by the assessee is not justified [Mehta
Parikh & Co. vs. CIT 30 ITR 181 at 187 (SC)!
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Ashok Chaddha vs Income Tax Officer on 27 July, 2011
9. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashok
Chaddha Vs. Income Tax Officer (2011) 14 taxmann.com 57 held as
under:-
1