RAJENDRAKUIMAR CHAMPALAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIAT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5384/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 November 2016AY 2012-1310 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 4,20,000/- was not based on any incriminating material and that the actual difference in jewellery value was Rs. 10,80,000/-, which was already offered to tax.

What were the facts?

During a search, the assessee offered Rs. 15,00,000/- as income to cover discrepancies in jewellery. However, in the return of income, only Rs. 10,80,000/- was offered, creating a difference of Rs. 4,20,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 4,20,000/- made on account of a difference between the amount offered during search and the amount offered in the return of income is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132(4),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

Hearing: 16.11.2016Pronounced: 30.11.2016

आदेश की प्रनिलऱपऩ अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीऱाथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent 2. आयकर आयुक्त(अपीऱ) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT – concerned 4. ववभागीय प्रतततनधि, आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाडड फाईऱ / Guard File 6. आदेशधन सधर/ BY ORDER, True copy उऩ/सहधयक ऩंजीकधर (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM श्री महधपवर लसंग, न्यधनयक सदस्य एवं श्री रधजेश क मधर, ऱेखध सदस्य के समऺ आयकर अपीऱ सं./ (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बनाम/ Rajendrakumar Champalal Asstt. Commissioner of Income Jain, Tax, Central Circle-29, Vs. Flat No.2201, 22nd floor, Room No.411,4th floor, Ashiyana Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, Laxmibai Jagmohan Marg, M K Road, 25, Nepeansea road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400036 (अपीऱार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. स्र्थायी ऱेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN. : PAN :AAAPJ83332J अपीऱार्थी की ओर से / Assessee by Shri D B Sangvi प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Shri B S Bist CORRIGENDUM The Tribunal has passed order in this appeal on 30.11.2016 and in the title of the appeal, the name and address of the assessee has been mentioned as “Ravindra Champalal Jain, 1901/02 Darshan Heights Zabavadi, Thakurdwar, Mumbai-- 400002”. By way of this corrigendum, we replace the name of the assessee and the address of the assessee “Rajendrakumar Champalal Jain, Flat No.2201, 22nd floor, Ashiyana Tower, Laxmibai Jagmohan Marg,25, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036”. Sd sd (MAHAVIR SINGH ) (RAJESH KUMAR) Judicial Member Accountant Member म ंबई Mumbai: 8th Feb, 2017.

More judgments on Section 132(4)

All 3,819 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →