VIJAY KUMAR KHERIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 22 & 30, MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the substantive addition had attained finality in favour of the Revenue, the appeal against the protective addition had become infructuous.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against a protective addition of Rs. 4,80,276/- made by the AO. The substantive addition for the same amount was made in the name of Shri Pavan Kumar Agarwal.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal against a protective addition is maintainable when the substantive addition has attained finality.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO
सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 27.06.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2016 आदेश / O R D E R
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee on 5.5.2016 is against the order of the CIT (A)-51, Mumbai dated 15.2.2016 for the assessment year 2009-2010.
At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee briefly narrated the facts of the case and submitted that this is a case of protective addition whereby AO made an addition of Rs. 4,80,276/-. Further, mentioning that the substantive addition was made in the name of Shri Pavan Kumar Agarwal, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition made on substantive basis has attained finality and that assessee paid taxes too. In this regard, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought my attention to page 6 of the assessment order in the case of Mr. P.K. Agarwal and the confirmation letter from Shri P.K. Agarwal about the fact of finality on the said addition. A copy of confirmation letter dated 18.6.2016, whereby the following lines are mentioned in his letter. “I Pawankumar Kisanlal Agarwal, holder of PAN AFIPA4706J hereby confirm that I have not preferred or not going to prefer any appeal against Assessment Order for AY 2009-2010 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28/03/2016 by Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Thane. Sd/-xxxx (Pawankumar Kisanlal Agarwal)”
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026