Baladin Ram v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Inderpal Singh Wadhawan, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ong in treating them as income of the appellant for the year under consideration. Since the liability still existed in the books of accounts, the same cannot be treated as income. The decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Baladinram Vs. CiT (1969) 71 ITR 427 and the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dalmia (R) (1986) 157 ITR 221 supports the appellant's case. Therefore in view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements I hold that the AO is not correct in making addition of outstanding balances pertaining to earlier years duri…

Mr. Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ong in treating them as income of the appellant for the year under consideration. Since the liability still existed in the books of accounts, the same cannot be treated as income. The decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Baladinram Vs. CiT (1969) 71 ITR 427 and the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dalmia (R) (1986) 157 ITR 221 supports the appellant's case. Therefore in view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements I hold that the AO is not correct in making addition of outstanding balances pertaining to earlier years duri…

Mr. Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ong in treating them as income of the appellant for the year under consideration. Since the liability still existed in the books of accounts, the same cannot be treated as income. The decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Baladinram Vs. CiT (1969) 71 ITR 427 and the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dalmia (R) (1986) 157 ITR 221 supports the appellant's case. Therefore in view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements I hold that the AO is not correct in making addition of outstanding balances pertaining to earlier years duri…

Smt. Madhu Bhatnagar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…t is trite law that an addition under Section 68 can be made only in the year in which credit was made to the account of the creditors in the books of account maintained. Kindly refer to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar Hansraj Vs. CIT, (1969) 71 ITR 427 (SC). Admittedly, in this case the credit to the account of creditors was made in the earlier years and therefore, the amount even cannot be brought to tax under Section 68 in the year under appeal. However, it is open to the Department to levy tax on such amount by resorting to the remedies available under the provisions of Act by duly following…