ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers

128 Taxmann.com 291Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2021#1097 most cited

What is ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers authority for?

An abnormal increase in declared cash sales and deposits during demonetization does not warrant an addition under Section 68, as Section 68 applies to unexplained cash credits, not disclosed sales receipts supported by stock and purchases.

101

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers · Section 68 · cash sales demonetization · unexplained cash credit · sales receipts · rejection of books of account · stock matching · Section 115BBE · addition under section 68

Also reported as

189 ITD 608

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 145(3)Section 69ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44AB

Issues it is cited on

addition u/s 68addition under section 68section 131(1)rejection of books of accountsection 145(3)section 44abpreponderance of probabilitysection 115bbsection 145section 115bsection 115bbedouble taxation

Judgments citing ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers

Balmukand Gattani DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Radhika Diamonds, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1632/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Demonetization & Quantum Of Cash Sales Was Abruptly On Higher Side ?

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 145(3)Section 68

…v. Radhika Jewellers - ITA 201/Ahd/2023; ➤DCIT v. Damodardas Mohanlal Chokshi - ITA 554/Ahd/2023; ➤ CIT vs. Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd. - ITA 2471 of 2009 (Guj); ➤CIT vs Kailash Jewellery House - ITA 613/2020 (Delhi HC); ➤ ACIT vs Hirapanna Jewellers- (2021) 189 ITD 608 (Visakapatnam); ➤Sanand Textiles Industries vs. DCIT - ITA 995/Ahd/2014; ➤ ITO vs. Rajeshkumar Chhanalal Patel - ITA 2159/Ahd/2016; 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. From the perusal of the records, it can be seen that the assessee generated cash on account of business activities and th…

M/S. V.N. Exports, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 817/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year. 2017-18 M/s. V N Exports The ACIT, 4th Floor, S N House, Circle-5(2)(1), Law Garden, Vs Ahmedabad Swagat Cross Roads, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 PAN: AACFV2817L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 24-10-2024 Date of pronouncement : 23-01-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is…

Jitendra Kumar Tahilramani, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-2, Jaipur.

ITA 928/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR (Th. V.C.)
Section 143(3)Section 68

…n the case of Pr. CIT (Central)-3 V/s. M/s. Agson Global Pvt. Ltd. In ITA No. 68-73/2021 and various other High Courts and decision of Hon'ble ITAT Vishakhapatnam Bench on identical issue in the case of ACIT v/s. Hirapanna Jewellers MANU/IV/0034/2021 : (2021) 128 Taxmann.com 29 held that the assessee was maintaining complete stock tally, the sales were recorded in the regular books of accounts and the amount was deposited in the bank account out of the sale proceeds, therefore, the addition made by the AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) was no justified. Sales made by the assessee to cover the cash deposited in t…

ACIT, Circle-1, Bareilly vs. Shri Sachit Kumar Agarwal, Bareilly

In the result, the impugned order of learned CIT(A) is sustained, and

ITA 396/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(2)Section 68

…Page 1 of 16 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH 'B', LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.396/Lkw/2020 Assessment Year:2017-18 A.C.I.T., Circle-1, Bareilly. (Appellant) Vs. Shri Sachit Kumar Agarwal, 291, Sahukara, Bareilly. PAN:AETPA3061L (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT (D.R.) ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) In this case assessment order dated 30/12/2091 was passed u/s 143(3) of the I. T. Act whereby the assessee's total income was assessed at Rs…

DCIT, Central Circle-II, Noida vs. Nagpal Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1596/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Dcit Vs Nagpal Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-Ii 697 Katra Neel Chandni Noida. Chowk, New Delhi-110006. Pan-Aabcn9620F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2021-22] DCIT vs Nagpal Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-II 697 Katra Neel Chandni Noida. Chowk, New Delhi-110006. PAN-AABCN9620F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR Respondent by Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, CA Date of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 18.12.2024 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue seeking to assail the First App…

Income Tax Officer, Kolkata vs. Jkj Jewellers (Hcm), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 420/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Jkj Jewellers (Hcm) Income Tax Officer 1St Floor, 18, Hanspukur First 3, Govt. Place (West), Ground Lane, Burrabazar, Floor, Kolkata-700069, West Vs. Kolkata-700007, Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakfj7956Q Co No. 26/Kol/2024 (Arising In Ita No. 420/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2017-18) Jkj Jewellers (Hcm) Income Tax Officer 1St Floor, 18, Hanspukur First 3, Govt. Place (West), Ground Lane, Burrabazar, Floor, Kolkata-700069, Vs. Kolkata-700007, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR
Section 143Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM JKJ Jewellers (HCM) Income Tax officer 1st Floor, 18, Hanspukur First 3, Govt. Place (West), Ground Lane, Burrabazar, Floor, Kolkata-700069, West Vs. Kolkata-700007, Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAKFJ7956Q CO No. 26/KOL/2024 (Arising in ITA No. 420/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18) JKJ Jewellers (HCM) Income Tax officer 1st Floor, 18, Hanspukur First 3, Govt. Place (West), Ground Lane, Burrabazar, Floor, Kolkata-700069, Vs. Kolkata-700007, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Resp…

DCIT, Central Circle-01, New Delhi vs. Manuvel Mezhukanal, New Delhi

ITA 1550/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs Manuvel Mezhukanal, Central Circle-01, 209-10, Mohan Singh Place, New Delhi. Ina Market, New Delhi. Pan: Ablpv5671Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Parth Singhal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 31.01.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.10504/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Acit, Circle 53(1), Delhi, (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Vs Manuvel Mezhukanal, Central Circle-01, 209-10, Mohan Singh Place, New Delhi. INA Market, New Delhi. PAN: ABLPV5671Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Parth Singhal, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05.12.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order dated 31.01.2…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cuddalore vs. Cholaji Kanniyalal, Kamaraj Street, Villupuram

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1674/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1674/Chny/2024 & Co No.: 51/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Cholaji Kanniyalal, Income Tax, V. No. 191, Kamaraj Street, Circle -1, Villupuram, Cuddalore – 607 002. Tamil Nadu – 605 602. [Pan: Aaepk-4555-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit Department By : Ms. Nidhi D. Jain, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2024

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCITFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi D. Jain, CA
Section 139(1)Section 44ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस िव"ने" रिव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.: 1674/Chny/2024 & CO No.: 51/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner of Cholaji Kanniyalal, Income Tax, v. No. 191, Kamaraj Street, Circle -1, Villupuram, Cuddalore – 607 002. Tamil nadu – 605 602. [PAN: AAEPK-4555-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee by : Ms. Go…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Mahendrakumar Laljibhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 194/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2017-18 The ACIT, Shri Mahendrakumar Circle-2(1)(1), Laljibhai Patel, Ahmedabad Vs 13, Amiganga Complex, Rohit Mill Circles Kokhra, Ahmedabad – 380026 PAN: ABR PP 5735 B (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. & Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 27-08-2024 Date of pronouncement : 06-11-2024 आदेश/ORDER PER : TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is f…

Jaykumar Nemichand Jain, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 944/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.944/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jaykumar Nemichand Jain Huf The Ito बनाम Jain Silver Palace Ward-5(2)(2) / 39, Chinubhai Towers Ahmedabad V/S. Ashram Road Opp. Handloom House Ahmedabad – 380 009 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadhj 7308 F अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “ए“, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का"ले, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद" के सम"। ] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.944/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jaykumar Nemichand Jain HUF The ITO बनाम Jain Silver Palace Ward-5(2)(2) / 39, Chinubhai Towers Ahmedabad v/s. Ashram Road Opp. Handloom House Ahmedabad – 380 009 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AADHJ 7308 F अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee by…

ACIT, Circle-22(2), New Delhi vs. Samvardhan Marketing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 27/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar, Judicialmember Acit, Circle 22(2), Vs. Samvardhan Marketing Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 2366, Satya Chambers, Rajguru Road, Paharganj, New Delhi – 110 055 (Pan: Aalcs8254L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajkumar, Ca Shri J.P. Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sujit Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2024 Date Of Order : 16.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am :

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sujit Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIALMEMBER ACIT, Circle 22(2), vs. Samvardhan Marketing Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 2366, Satya Chambers, Rajguru Road, Paharganj, New Delhi – 110 055 (PAN: AALCS8254L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rajkumar, CA Shri J.P. Sharma, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sujit Kumar, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 05.08.2024 Date of Order : 16.10.2024 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/…

Ziva Jewellery Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(3)(1) (Earlier 11(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2625/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee () & Miss. Padmavathy S. () Ziva Jewellery Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Gems Industries, Plot No.A/30, 2Nd Income-Tax,Circle 3(3)(1) [Earlier Floor, Road No.3, Midc, Andheri East, 11(3)(2), Mumbai Mumabai-400 093 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Pan : Aaacz2058C Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Respondent

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…1 Ziva Jewellery Private Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MISS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Ziva Jewellery Private Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner of Gems Industries, Plot No.A/30, 2nd Income-tax,Circle 3(3)(1) [Earlier Floor, Road No.3, MIDC, Andheri East, 11(3)(2), Mumbai Mumabai-400 093 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road PAN : AAACZ2058C Mumbai-400 020 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Rashmikant Modi and Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Department represented by Shri Swapnil Savant (JCIT) Date of hearing 09/09/20…

Pradeep Kumar, Lucknow vs. ACIT-1, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 198/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2017-18 Pradeep Kumar V. The Acit-1 A-1/46, Vikas Khand Lucknow Gomti Nagar Lucknow Pan:Ablpk8392B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Prakash Agrawal, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 04 09 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Prakash Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI G. D. PADAMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pradeep Kumar v. The ACIT-1 A-1/46, Vikas Khand Lucknow Gomti Nagar Lucknow PAN:ABLPK8392B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vijay Prakash Agrawal, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date of hearing: 10 07 2024 Date of pronouncement: 04 09 2024 O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delh…

Kuppusamy Meiyappan, Salem vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 647/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.647/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kuppusamy Meiyappan, The Dy. Commissioner Of 2/263, Perumal Koil Medu Street, Vs. Income Tax, No.8, Seelanaickanpatty, Circle-1(1), Salem – 636 201. Salem. [Pan: Alppm 0517Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथF की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate HiथF की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter “Cit(A)”] In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059373357(1), Dated 04.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 29.12.2019. :- 2 -: 2. There Is A Delay Of 8 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

…crores and the respective net profit rate are @ 0.76% & 0.78%. When the accounts of the assessee were not found to be defective, the additions made is required to be deleted and relied on the following decisions: • 134 Taxmann.com 256 (Del) or 441 ITR 550 • 189 ITD 608 (Vizag Tribunal) and • ITA No.76/Vizag/2021 dated 16/03/2022. 6. Considering the assessee’s submissions, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition to the tune of Rs.82,48,840/- on account deposits made after 15/11/2016 out of cash on hand held on 08/11/2016 and sustained the addition of Rs.88,23,659/- holding as under: “16.0 On merits of the case, t…

Anil Kumar Ahuja, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward 2, Rewari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3004/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 69A

…deposited during the demonetization period as non genuine without appreciating the fact that same was generated from the business and deserved to be held as business receipts. 4.Judicial precedents in favour of assessee: ACIT Vs. Hirapanna Jewellers. [2021] 189 ITD 608 (Visakhapatnam.Trib): 7 In this case the observations of the Tribunal was as under: "9. In view of the foregoing discussion and taking into consideration of all the facts and the circumstances of the case, we have no hesitation to hold that the cash receipts represent the sales which the assessee has rightly offered for taxation. We have gone t…

Ram Kumar Gupta, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 43, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 309/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.309/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ram Kumar Gupta…...…………….....……………………....………....Appellant 67/46, Posta Chowrasta, Kolkata -700007. [Pan: Adrpg8556B] Vs. Acit, Circle-43, Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajiva Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit- Dr On Behalf Of P. P. Barman, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 09, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.1,10,46,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Cash Deposits In The Bank Account Of The Assessee During Demonetization Period. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Derives Income From Retail Trading In The Name Of M/S R. Kumar & Co. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 28.07.2017 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.8,19,420/-. The Return Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S

Section 250Section 44ASection 68

…al observed that the cash sales could not be treated as undisclosed income and no addition could be made once again in respect of the same. The findings of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal do not require any interference. 1.12 In ACIT Vs Hirapanna Jewellers [2021] 189 ITD 608, it was held that since the assessee explained the source of the cash deposits made in its bank account post demonetization as sales of jewellery, produced sale bills, admitted the same as revenue receipt, offered it to tax and the outgo of stocks was matching with sales, impugned addition was to be deleted. The relevant Para of the order is extr…

ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Kundan Jewellers, Mumbai

In the result, additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4493/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Us Challenging The Validity Of Reopening U/S.147 On The Following Grounds:- “1.On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Nfac Has Erred In Not Adjudicating The Ground Of The Assessee Challenging The Validity Of Reassessment, Which Is Time-Barred Considering The Provisions Of The Act. The Assessee Respectfully Submits That The Reassessment Made Is Time Barred & Therefore The Same Deserves To Be Quashed. 2 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit (A) Has Erred In Not Adjudicating The Additional Ground Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee During The Course Of The Appeal Proceedings. The Assessee Respectfully Submits That The Issue Of Statutory Notices /S. 148 Of The Act By The Jurisdictional Assessing Officer Is In Violation Of The Provisions Of Section 151A Of The Act & The Notifications Issued Thereunder. Accordingly The Reassessment In Pursuance Of Such Notices Is Invalid & Deserves To Be Quashed.”

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1) Vs. M/s. Kundan Jewellers Mumbai Pvt. Ltd. Room No.575, 5th Floor 223, S.M. Patil Building Aayakar Bhavan S.V. Road M.K.Road Andheri Railway Mumbai-400 020 Station Mumbai – 400 021 PAN/GIR No.AABCK5770H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ketan L. Vajani Revenue by Shri P.D. Chougule Date of Hearing 03/07/2024 Date of Pronouncement 25/07/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against order…

The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Radhika Jewellers, Vadodara

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 201/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Acit Radhika Jewellers Circle-1(1)(1) Vs 14/16, Indrapuri Complex Vadodara New Sama Road, Sama Vadodara – 380 006 (Gujarat) Pan: Aahfr 2958 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parma, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 68

…consideration and upon obtaining the remand report, the Ld.CIT(A) passed his order. 6.4. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements, which we have evaluated and considered: 1. ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers, (2021) 189 ITD 608 (Visakhapatnam). The Tribunal in Hirapanna Jewellers held that when sales are duly recorded and offered for tax, the same amount cannot be added again as unexplained income under section 68 of the Act. 2. Balwinder Kumar vs. ITO, (2023) 151 taxmann.com 338 (Amritsar). The Tribunal emphasized that additions cannot be made based on mere assumption…

Rakesh Malhotra, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-36(4), Civic Centre, Minto Road, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3571/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3571/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…increase in the cash sale and their deposit in the bank account consequent to demonization could not be basis for the rejection of account and addition u/s 68 of the Act. The Tribunal Bench at Vishakhapatnam in the case of ACIT Vs. Hirapanna Jewellers (2021) 189 ITD 608 (Visaks) held as under:- "7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the instant case, the assessee has admitted the receipts as sales and offered for taxation. The assessing Fine Gujranwala Jewellers, officer made the addition u/s 68 as, unexplained cash credit of the same amount which was accounted in the bo…

DCIT Central Circle-13, Jhandewalan New Delhi vs. Magic Auto Pvt Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2152/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 68

…cisions of High Court and the Tribunal as under: i) PCIT vs Agson Global Pvt Ltd (2022) 441 ITR 550 (Delhi) ii) DCIT vs Bawa Jewellers Pvt LtdITA No. 352/DEL/2021 iii) Fine Gujranwala Jewellers Vs. ITO ITA No. 1540/DEL/2022 iv) ACIT Vs. HirapannaJewellers 96 ITR 24 v) ACIT Vs. M/s Ramlal Jewellers Pvt Ltd ITA No. 1600/Mum/2023 vi) ACIT Vs. Chandra Surana 104 ITR 503 104 ITR503 vii) AddulRazaak Vs, ITO 202 ITD 161 viii) R.S. Diamonds India [Pvt] Ltd Vs. ACIT 98 ITR 505 15. The ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently denied the allegations of the Assessing Officer that there were no verifiable details of…