339 ITR 351 (Guj), CIT v. Satya Narain Patni

41 Taxmann.com 295High Court2014#1667 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Satya Narain Patni · 339 ITR 351 (Guj) · 41 Taxmann.com 295 · Instruction No. 1916 · jewellery found during search · unexplained jewellery · section 132 · section 292C · addition for seized jewellery · income tax search

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153C Section 153A Section 144 Section 115BBE Section 292C Section 132 Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 158bd cash found during search income tax settlement commission jewellery found during search section 144a unexplained jewellery section 269ss section 150 specified authority block period section 292c section 65b

Judgments citing 339 ITR 351 (Guj), CIT v. Satya Narain Patni

The Dy CIT, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Mehul Johnson, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1647/MUM/2020[2017-78]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2017-78

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1647/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Mehul Johnson, Dcit Cen. Cir. 6(4), 2808, 28Th Floor, R. No. 1925, 19Th Imperial Tower, M P Floor, Air India बिधम/ Mill’S Compound, Building, Nariman Vs. Tardeo, Point, Mumbai-400 034 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Abbpj3414H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Mahesh Akhade, Ld. Dr By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent : Shri Gautam Jain, Ld. Ar By सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 11.05.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 19.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Impugned Order Dated 07.07.2020, Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai For The Quantum Appeal Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3)

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh AkhadeFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Jain, Ld

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM, & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1647/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Mehul Johnson, DCIT Cen. Cir. 6(4), 2808, 28th floor, R. No. 1925, 19th Imperial tower, M P floor, Air India बिधम/ Mill’s Compound, Building, Nariman Vs. Tardeo, point, Mumbai-400 034 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. ABBPJ3414H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Mahesh Akhade, Ld. DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent : Shri Gautam Jain, Ld. AR by सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 11.05.2…

The DCIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Dipak Kalani, Indore

In the result, revenue’s appeals in IT(SS)A 104

ITA 1045/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…Pankaj and Deepak Kalani 1 (SS) 99 of 2016 and others आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING IT(SS)A Nos.99 to 101/Ind/2016 & ITA No.1044/Ind/2016 Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2010-11 & 2012-13 DCIT, Central-1, Indore : Appellant V/s Pankaj Kalani, Indore PAN – ADUPK 6103 B : Respondent CO No.25/Ind/2017 Arising out of ITA No.1044/Ind/2016 Assessment Year 2012-13 Pankaj Kalani, Indore PAN – ADUPK 6103 B : Appellant V/s DCIT, Central-1, Indore : Re…

The DCIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Pankaj Kalani, Indore

In the result, revenue’s appeals in IT(SS)A 104

ITA 1044/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Reena Goel, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4483/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, C. A.; &For Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 4483/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Smt. Reena Goel, DCIT, E–270, Shastri Nagar, Vs. Central Circle :25, New Delhi–110005. New Delhi. PAN: AIAPG0202C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hiren Mehta, C. A.; & Shri Nirbhay Mehta, C. A.; Department by : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. D.R.; Date of Hearing : 7/09/2021 Date of pronouncement : 7/10/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is file…

Diwakar Sharma, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result ground no 2 of the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 849/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Diwakar Sharma, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Arun Ketan & Associates, 101, Central Circle, Csc, Dda Market, Pushpanjali, New Noida Delhi Pan: Aohps3660K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…/- may further to be reduced by Rs. 15,51,180/-. We find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in 260 ITR 249, Hon’ble Madras High Court in 370 ITR 364, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in 41 Taxmann.com 295, Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in 366 ITR 325, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 339 ITR 351. In substance all these Hon’ble High Courts have held that jewellery specified under CBDT Circular No. 1916 dated 11.05.1992 is a reasonable quantity which could be not added in the hands of the assessee even though circular is for the purpose of none s…

Anju Rajesh Poddar, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC43, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5830/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Smt. Anju Rajesh Poddar Vs. Acit – Cc 43, Room N.659, 6Th Floor 42, Gautam Apartments, 31, Juhu Road, Santacruz (W), Aayakar Bhawan Mumbai – 400 054 Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aahpp8890N Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM Smt. Anju Rajesh Poddar Vs. ACIT – CC 43, Room N.659, 6th Floor 42, Gautam Apartments, 31, Juhu Road, Santacruz (W), Aayakar Bhawan Mumbai – 400 054 Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No. AAHPP8890N Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri Devendra Jain Revenue by Shri R.P. Meena Date of Hearing 05/09/2018 Date of Pronouncement 12/09/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 48, Mumbai dated 2006-07 for A.Y.2006-07 in t…

Anju Rajesh Poddar, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 43, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5834/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri. D.T. Garasia & Ashwani Taneja

Section 153ASection 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI-“H”BENCH Before S/Shri. D.T. Garasia, Judicial Member & Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member ITA No.5834 & 5836 /MUM/2015 Assessment Years 2010 – 11 & 2012 – 13 Smt Anju Rajesh poddar, 42, v. ACIT CC 43 Room No.659, 6th Floor Aayakar Gautam Apartments, 31, Juhu Road, Santacruz (W), Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN No.AAHPP 8890N (Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Anant N Pai Respondent by Shri Rahul Raman Date of hearing : 02.02.2017 Date of pronouncement : 17/02/2017 O R D E R PER D.T.GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. In both the appeals…

M. Sushil Kumar, Kgf vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 644/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2015AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Naginchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Rebella, Asst.CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…which was also declared in her return in the wealth tax filed, then the entire gold and jewellery stands explained and therefore, no addition is called for. In support of his proposition, he relied on the following judgments; a. CIT Vs Ghanshyam das Johri 41 Taxmann.com 295 (All.) b. CIT Vs Ratanlal Vyparilal Jain 339 ITR 351 ITA No.644 & SP No.87(B)/2014 c. Harish S Patel Vs DCIT (2012) 6 Tax Corp (AT) 28617 d. CIT Vs Sayta Narain Patni 46 Taxmann.com 440 (Raj.) e. Pati Devi 240 ITR 727 8.1 On the other hand, learned DR relied on the orders of the authorities. 8.2 We have heard the rival submissions a…