SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CEN CIR 3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the expenditure was duly accounted for in the books and the stock found was part of the business inventory, already reflected in the audited accounts. Therefore, the additions were deleted.
What were the facts?
During a search, the Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for unexplained expenditure on shifting a plant and unexplained investment in stock. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed these additions.
What were the issues?
Whether the expenditure on shifting the plant and the stock found at the business premises were correctly treated as unexplained expenditure and investment, respectively.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 132,Section 143(3),Section 153B,Section 250,Section 69C,Section 69,Section 115BBE,Section 131
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Prakash
PER : PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as “the learned CIT(A)”] dated 26.09.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), arising out of the assessment order dated 29.06.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as “the AO”) under section 143(3) read with section 153B of the Act for the assessment year 2019-20. I.T.A No. 1481/JPR/2025 Page No 2
The grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee before us in the memoran- dum of appeal in
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026