ACIT v. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd.

46 SOT 250Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#10636 most cited

What is ACIT v. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Additions made by the Assessing Officer based solely on loose papers, which are not conclusive evidence, are insufficient for making additions to income. Such evidence cannot be considered definitive.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. · 46 SOT 250 · loose papers · inconclusive evidence · addition to income · search and seizure · assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 11(5)Section 115JASection 115JBSection 13(1)(c)Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

previous yeartransfersection 143prescribedpersoncompanysection 14section 143(3)indiatotal income

Judgments citing ACIT v. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd.

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…mpt income. In support of this contention, the Ld. AR placed reliance on following decisions: 1. Godrej Industries Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITAT), Godrej Agrovet Ltd Vs. ACIT. 2. Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2072/M/2009). 3. ACIT Vs. JP Morgan India P Ltd (46 SOT 250) (ITAT Mum) 4. DCIT Vs. M/s Philips Carbon Black Ltd (146 TTJ 175) Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7.4 After considering rival submissions, we are of the view that no disallowance was called for on this account as the issue is covered by the Page 14 ITA Nos. 3456 & 4099/Mum/2004 Α.Υ. 2000-01 M/s United Pho…

Laxmi Memorial Education Trust, Mangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1, Mangalore

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

ITA 756/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Srinivas Kamath, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 132

…n the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sanskruti Township v. Department of IT [IT Appeal No. 1885 (Ahd.) of 2006, dated 23-9-2011] and Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. C. Krishna Yadav [2011] 12 taxmann.com 4/46 SOT 250 (Hyd.)(URO). (h) There is evidence in the seized record that the Department has typed some information by making use of assessee's computer and made part of the Panchnama. This fact was pointed out by the chairman of the assessee, Sri B. Srinivasa Rao in the course of his statement recorded on 17th Dec, 2009. This act on the part of the search par…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Lingiah Amidyala, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 702/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Sri Kumar Adithya
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 292C

…e to the following effect : 1. Chariminar Bottling Co. (P) Ltd – ITA No.1344/H/2013. 2. PCIT Vs. Tarun Kumar Goyal dt.24.08.2022 of Telangana High Court. 3. ITA Nos.456 and 457/Hyd/2020 in the case of Tarun Kumar Goyal. 4. DCIT Vs. C.Krishna Yadav reported in 46 SOT 250. 5. Romi Lal Nanda Vs. ITO – ITA No.792/Del/2016. 6. CIT Vs. S.M. Aggarwal – Order dt.29.03.2007 of Delhi High Court. 7. CIT Vs. Vivek Aggarwal – Order dt.09.02.2015 of Delhi High Court. 8. CIT(Central)-3, Vs. Sri Praveen Juneja – Delhi High Court. 9. DCIT, Central-1, Bhopal Vs. Jasjeet Singh Walia – ITA No.183/Ind/2020. 10. ACIT Vs. Ld. DR. Kamal…

Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon, Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, this appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 40/IND/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon Dcit-1(1) M-4, Radio Colony, Bhopal बनाम Indore /Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aespj9459E Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri Aditya Shukla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 147

…nal referring to the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs Anil Bhalla (supra), CIT Vs Dinesh Jain (HUF) 211 Taxman 23 (Del) and CIT vs Jaipal Aggarwal 212 Taxman 1 (Del), ITAT Mumbai in the case of ACIT vs. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. 46 SOT 250 (Mumbai). It has been held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer based on loose papers which is not a conclusive evidence therefore such evidence is not sufficient for making addition. In this case the observations of the Tribunal read as follows: - "we have heard the arguments of both the parties, perused the record and have gone throug…

M/S. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Sri Ramasubramaniyan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…n the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sanskruti Township v. Department of IT [IT Appeal No. 1885 (Ahd.) of 2006, dated 23-9-2011] and Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. C. Krishna Yadav [2011] 12 taxmann.com 4/46 SOT 250 (Hyd.)(URO). (h) There is evidence in the seized record that the Department has typed some information by making use of assessee's computer and made part of the Panchnama. This fact was pointed out by the chairman of the assessee, Sri B. Srinivasa Rao in the course of his statement recorded on 17th Dec, 2009. This act on the part of the search par…

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad vs. Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’A’’BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. Asstt. Name of Name of ITA/IT(SS)A No. Year Appellant Respondent Pawan Satyanarain Jalan, 275, New Cloth Market, A.C.I.T., IT(SS)A Outside Raipur gate, Circle-1(2), 1. No.134/Ahd/2021 2018-19 Raipur, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad- 380002. PAN:AAVPJ9612Q Pawan Satyanarain Jalan, 275, New Cloth Market, Outside Raipur A.C.I.T., ITA No. 2019-20 gate, Raipur, Circle-1(2), 2. 182/Ahd/2021 Ahmedabad-…

Pawan Satynarayan Jalan, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2)., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 182/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’A’’BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. Asstt. Name of Name of ITA/IT(SS)A No. Year Appellant Respondent Pawan Satyanarain Jalan, 275, New Cloth Market, A.C.I.T., IT(SS)A Outside Raipur gate, Circle-1(2), 1. No.134/Ahd/2021 2018-19 Raipur, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad- 380002. PAN:AAVPJ9612Q Pawan Satyanarain Jalan, 275, New Cloth Market, Outside Raipur A.C.I.T., ITA No. 2019-20 gate, Raipur, Circle-1(2), 2. 182/Ahd/2021 Ahmedabad-…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1 (1), Bhopal vs. Shri Neeraj Mandloi, New Delhi

ITA 680/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153C

…unal referring to the decisions of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs Anil Bhalla (supra), CIT Vs Dinesh Jain (HUF) 211 Taxman 23 (Del) and CIT vs Jaipal Aggarwal 212 Taxman 1 (Del), ITAT Mumbai in the case of ACIT vs. JP Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. 46 SOT 250 (Mumbai). It has been held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer based on loose papers which is not a conclusive evidence therefore such evidence is not sufficient for making addition. In this case the observations of the Tribunal read as follows: - “we have heard the arguments of both the parties, perused the record and have gone throug…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. Shri Ganpati Developers, Kota

In the result, both i.e. appeal of the Revenue and C

ITA 1348/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1348/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 A.C.I.T., Cuke M/S Shri Ganpati Developers, Vs. Circle-1, C-150, Road No. 5, I.P.I.A., Kota. Kota. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abzfs 8967 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1348/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2015-16 A.C.I.T., cuke M/s Shri Ganpati Developers, Vs. Circle-1, C-150, Road No. 5, I.P.I.A., Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABZFS 8967 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent C.O. No. 08/JP/2019 (Arising out of ITA No. 1348/JP/2018) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/s Shri Ganpati Devel…

Jalan Carbons & Chemiclas (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir 4(2), Kol., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.361/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal& Amit Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 45(4)

…ny thatthese projects were undertaken by it, and upheld the deletion ofthe impugned addition under s. 69C, findings arrived at by theTribunal are pure findings of facts and the same do not warrantany interference. 2. ACIT Vs. J.P. Morgan India (P) Ltd. [2011] 46 SOT 250 (Mum.) 3. CIT Vs. Dinesh Jain HUF [2012] 211 Taxman 23 (Delhi) 4. CIT Vs. Jaipal Aggarwal [2013] 212 Taxman 1 (Delhi) –wherein it was held that Dumb documents seized, ie from whichnothing could be clearly understood, cannot form a justifiedbase for making additions to income of the assessee. 17.1 In view of the above discussion, we are of the view…