INCOME TAX OFFICER-27(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. MURUGAN K. NAIKAR, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5760/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 September 2019AY 2009-20106 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 upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following a coordinate bench's order in a similar case. The CIT(A) had rightly pointed out the lack of AO's enquiry and considered documents establishing the loan's genuineness.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions made on account of bogus unsecured loans and interest thereon. The AO had treated the loan from Meridian Gems as an accommodation entry from a dummy concern.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of bogus unsecured loans and interest thereon was justified when the loan-giving entity was alleged to be a dummy concern.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &, Shri Govind Jhaveri
For Respondent: Shri Vikas KR.Agarwal &, Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Shri Vijay Mehta &, Shri Govind Jhaveri

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Mumbai 3. आयकर आयु�त / CIT, Mumbai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai गाड� फाईल / Guard file 6.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →