ASHWINI BALDEVRAJ MALHOTRA,PUNE vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER,

ITA 2460/PUN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 February 2018AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the credit card payments were made by the two companies on behalf of the assessee and supported by evidence, no addition should be made in the hands of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's credit card payments were added to his income by the Assessing Officer. The assessee claimed these payments were made by two companies, Weikfield Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Weikfield Products Pvt. Ltd. The CIT(A) sustained a part of the addition after reviewing some evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether credit card payments made by third-party companies on behalf of the assessee can be added to the assessee's income without proper evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

For Appellant: Shri R.G. Nahar
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Hearing: 22.02.2018Pronounced: 28.02.2018

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of CIT(A), Pune-5, Pune, dated 22.07.2016 relating to assessment year 2009-10 against order passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2 Shri Ashwini Baldevraj Malhotra

2.

The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:-

1.

On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →