ACIT 25(2), MUMBAI vs. H.K. PUJARA BUILDERS, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5307/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 February 2020AY 2008-099 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had discharged the initial onus by providing confirmations, IT returns, and bank statements of the lenders. Since the facts were similar to the preceding assessment year where the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, the CIT(A)'s order was upheld.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) added ₹5,00,00,000/- on account of unsecured loans, considering them as bogus accommodation entries based on information from the DGIT (Inv.). The CIT(A) deleted this addition, relying on previous ITAT decisions in the assessee's own case.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of unsecured loans is sustainable when the assessee has provided documentary evidence and the issue is covered by previous ITAT decisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jotwani (AR)
For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube (DR), Shri Prakash Jotwani (AR)
Hearing: 07/01/2020Pronounced: 21/02/2020

आदेश प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आय क्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आय क्त / CIT

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →