Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar

97 ITR 696High Court1974#699 most cited

What is Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made solely based on documents or material found from a third party's premises unless the Assessing Officer conducts an independent investigation, examines the third party, and establishes a clear link between the material and the assessee.

145

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar · 97 ITR 696 · section 132 · section 132(4A) · documents from third party · material from third party · independent investigation · additions to income · linking evidence · corroboration · unexplained income · 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4A)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 292CSection 69ASection 69CSection 153A

Issues it is cited on

hundi transactionsection 44afjewellery found during searchsection 132(4a)section 65bsection 65dumb documentssection 150unexplained jewellerysection 292cretraction of statementthird party information

Judgments citing Addl. CIT v. Miss Lata Mangeshkar

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1482/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. K. N. Charyita No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs Acit, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aefps6298M

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member ITA No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEFPS6298M ITA No. 1476/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1477/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1478/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ritu Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Gre…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1476/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. K. N. Charyita No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs Acit, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aefps6298M

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member ITA No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEFPS6298M ITA No. 1476/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1477/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1478/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ritu Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Gre…

Brij Bhushan Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1414/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. K. N. Charyita No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs Acit, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aefps6298M

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member ITA No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEFPS6298M ITA No. 1476/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1477/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1478/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ritu Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Gre…

Brij Bhushan Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1413/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. K. N. Charyita No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs Acit, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aefps6298M

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member ITA No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEFPS6298M ITA No. 1476/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1477/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1478/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ritu Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Gre…

Brij Bhushan Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1412/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. K. N. Charyita No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs Acit, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aefps6298M

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member ITA No. 1412/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1413/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1414/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Brij Bhushan Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Greater Kailash, Part-II, Central Circle-3, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEFPS6298M ITA No. 1476/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 1477/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 1478/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ritu Singal, Vs ACIT, W-29, Gre…

Mrs. Sumedha Sudam Kamthe, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2172/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69C

…overy Officer, in ITA No.334/PUN/2013, A.Y.2004-05 decided on 30th May, 2014. iii) Straptex (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, reported as 84 ITD 320 (Mum.) iv) Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Miss Lata Mangeshkar, reported as 97 ITR 696 (Bombay). 11. The Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted that the issue raised in ground of appeal No. 5 and 6 are on without prejudice basis and he fairly admitted that it was new plea being raised before the Tribunal and also admitted no agricultural income was shown in the hands of the assessee. 12. The Ld. DR for the Revenue pointed out tha…

DCIT, Circle-1, Siliguri vs. M/S Anand Kumar Agarwal, Siliguri

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 244/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12 Dcit Circle-1, V/S. Anand Kumar Agarwal Aayakar Bhawan, C/O Sky Wheels Pvt. Ltd. Paribahan Nagar, Paribahan Nagar, Matigar, Matigara, Siliguri, Pin Siliguri-734010 734010 [Pan No.Acrpa 8801 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-06-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Challenges Correctness Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 07.12.2016 In Case No.133/Cit(A)/Slg/2015-16, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Making Undisclosed On-Money Addition Of ₹1,10,00,000/-, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W 153C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. We Come To The Relevant Facts Pertaining To The Above Sole Issue. This Assessee Is Admittedly The Legal Heir Of Late Shri Bhanwarlal Agarwal. The Said Predecessor In Interest Co-Owned Capital Asset In Question Along With S/Sh R.K. Agarwal, Hanumnmal, Mahendra & Pawan Bansal(S). All The Said Joint Owners Sold The Relevant Asset On 21.01.2011 To M/S Patron Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. For ₹3,58,25,000/- Received Through Banking Channel. The Assessee’S

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

…rch of Dr. R.K.Agaral was a third party document found in the possessions of the third party and also very much belonging to the third party. Hon'ble Mumbai H.C. in the case of Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-IV, Miss Lata Mangeshkar [1974] 97 ITR 696 (Bom) has held that third party statements and documents were not proof enough that amounts in question were undisclosed income of the assessee. In the instant case not only the notings are a third party noting, but the fact remains that the name of Shri Anand Kumar Agarwal is not mentioned in the diary as recipient of cash nor has it been mention…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 132/BIL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 131/BIL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 130/BIL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 128/BIL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 127/BIL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri. Javed Ali Pradhan, Raipur

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 126/BIL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jan 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Singh, CITDR

…arified on the strength of circumstantial evidence to be otherwise, should not have been substituted for proof. In CIT v. Chamanlal Dhingra (1994) 121 Taxation 272 (AIL), the All HC, following the decision of the BOM. HC in Addl. CIT v. Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (BOM.) held that : " The seized documents cannot take the place of proof, rather they merely create suspicion and suspicion, however, grave does not take place of the truth. 1.32 In Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) it was held that the burden lay on the Deptt. to prove, by bringing proper evidence on record, that the impugned…

Regency Mahavir Properties, Pune vs. ACIT Cen Cir 1, Thane

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 682/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Sunil U Pathak & Smt Geetaa GuwalaniiFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 132Section 153A

…22 • T S Venkatesan vs ACIT 74 ITD 298 • Ketan Shah vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 11, Mumbai in ITA Nos. 2321 & 2322/Mum/2013 • Pavitra Real(W(P) Ltd vs. ACIT, Cen Cir-32, New Delhi/87 taxmann.com 142 (Delhi Trib) • Addl. Comm. of Income Tax: vs. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696 We have also gone through the seized paper found during the course of the search in the case of Ashray Premises Pvt. Ltd., copies of which are available at pages 196 and 197A of the paper-book. At page 196 is the Profit & loss account of Ashray Premises Pvt. Ltd. for the period 01.04.2006 to 3.08.2009. We noted that a sum of ` 7,60,00,000/- has b…

Kamakshi Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 481/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Dec 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT - DR &
Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…Ltd. v. DCIT (JP) (1999) 68 ITD 312 (Jp) 103 29 Kishan Chand chela Ram v. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) 103-104 30 Gargidin Jawala Prasad v. CIT 96 ITR 97 (All) 104-105 31 Parimisetti Seetharamamma v. CIT 57 ITR 532 (SC) 105-106 32 ACIT v/s Miss Lata Mangeshkar (1974) 97 ITR 696 (Bom.) 106-107 33 P.R. Gupta v/s DCIT (2006) 36 Tax World 44 107 14 M/s. Kamakshi Hospitality Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur 11. Ld. CIT(A) has neither appreciated the facts properly nor has applied the settled law in this regard. 12. During the course of appellant proceedings, specific requests were made to the ld. CIT(A) to allow…

Lakhmichand D Rohira, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC- 24 & 26, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2464/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Lakhmichand D. Rohira Acit-Cc-24 & 26, 2301, Dheeraj Height Gaurav, Mumbai Off. Oshiwara Link Rd., Vs. Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 053

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…on, it can be vice versa also. Meaning thereby these entries may reflect the receipt of money. Page 2 of 9 ITA Nos. 2464 & 2584/Mum/2012 (A.Y. 2005-06) Shri Lakhmichand D. Rohira 14. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Miss Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 696 has held that some entries in the accounts regarding payments was not sufficient as there was no guarantee that the entries were genuine. The entire addition have been made on the basis of the entries found in loose sheets being alleged payment on account of shop purchased from one M/s. Everest Developer. Surprisingly and for the reasons best know…

Shri Mohan Chandra Dalakoti, New Delhi vs. ITO, Haldwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 297/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 297/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Mohan Chandra Dalakoti, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Sandeep Sapra, Advocate, C- Ward-1(2), 763, New Friends Colony, Haldwani New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acxpd1990R Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.10.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A), Haldwani.

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 297/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Mohan Chandra Dalakoti, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o Sandeep Sapra, Advocate, C- Ward-1(2), 763, New Friends Colony, Haldwani New Delhi-110025 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ACXPD1990R Assessee by : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.06.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2017 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 04.10.2016 of ld. CIT(A), Haldwani. 2. Following grounds have been raised…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3549/DEL/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…wal, Sh. Prakash Dhariwal and Sh. SohanRaj Mehta. Therefore, the presumption applies to them and NOT to the Appellant. ITA Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 15 Mukesh Garg It has been held in the case of "Addl. CIT vs Miss. Lata Mangeshkar reported in (1974) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) that entries in the books of account regarding payment to an assessee was not sufficient as there was no guarantee that the entries were genuine. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SATYAPAL WASSAN [2007] 295 ITR (AT) 352 (Jabalpur). 3.2.5 This view has been echoed by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of SAIF ALI KHAN MANSURALI VS ASSISTAN…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3546/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…wal, Sh. Prakash Dhariwal and Sh. SohanRaj Mehta. Therefore, the presumption applies to them and NOT to the Appellant. ITA Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 15 Mukesh Garg It has been held in the case of "Addl. CIT vs Miss. Lata Mangeshkar reported in (1974) 97 ITR 696 (Bom) that entries in the books of account regarding payment to an assessee was not sufficient as there was no guarantee that the entries were genuine. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SATYAPAL WASSAN [2007] 295 ITR (AT) 352 (Jabalpur). 3.2.5 This view has been echoed by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of SAIF ALI KHAN MANSURALI VS ASSISTAN…

ITO 16(1)(3), Mumbai vs. L/H of Smt. Vimla Ratilal Mehta, Mumbai

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

ITA 3361/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3361/Mum/14 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) बनाम/ Income Tax Officer-16 Shri Ashok Mehta, L/H Of (L) Smt. Vimla Ratilal (1)(3) Vs. Mehta, 201, Jeevan Villa, Room No.220, 2Nd Floor, N Dhabholkar Road, Matru Mandir, Mumbai-400006 Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 132Section 69

…s conceded by the learned Departmental Representative that no such evidence has been brought on record Therefore the additions cannot be sustained and they are hereby deleted. " vi) Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT vs. Lata Mangeshkar reported in 97 ITR 696 wherein it was held that entries in the accounts of third party regarding payment to the assessee was not sufficient as there was no proof that the same was genuine. The Hon'ble High Court observed as under: "The income-tax authorities sought to assess certain income as income from undisclosed sources received by the assessee. 20 The evidence on…