Bela Juneja v. CIT

321 ITR 254High Court2010#4898 most cited

What is Bela Juneja v. CIT authority for?

Presumptions raised under section 132(4A) regarding the contents of documents found during a search can be rebutted.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Bela Juneja v. CIT · Surendra M. Khandhar v. ACIT · 321 ITR 254 · section 132(4A) · section 292C · presumption · search proceedings · seized documents · rebuttal

Also reported as

20 Taxmann.com 392

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68Section 69Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 132section 15section 13personcompanybusinessdocument

Judgments citing Bela Juneja v. CIT

Sayed Ahmed Abbas Naqvi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2807/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2807 & 2808/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06) Syed Ahmed Abbas Naqvi Dy. Cit, Central Circle-2, बनाम/ 705, Sea Creast No. 2, Mumbai J. P. Road, Seven Bunglows, Vs. Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 061 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Abvpn 7551 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Girish Dave & Ms.Kadambari Dave सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.09.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: The Assessee, An Individual, Is A Mumbai Based Interior Designer. He, Along With His Wife, Muskan Naqvi, Was Subject To Search Action U/S.132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) By The Investigation Wing (Mumbai) Of The Revenue At Their Residence, On 05.01.2007, As A Part Of The Search Operations On Hasan Ali Khan (Hak) Group. The Case Was Subsequently Centralized With Central Circle-2, Mumbai On 20.03.2007 & Assessment For The Different Years Framed U/S.153A R/W S. 143(3) Of The Act. We Are In These Appeals Concerned With The Assessments For Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2004-05 & 2005-06, Made Vide Assessment Orders Dated 31.12.2008

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Girish Dave &
Section 132Section 153A

…tment by the assessee in a joint venture with Mr. Nirmal Daftary, the source of which being unexplained would stand to be deemed as unexplained income u/s. 69, also drawing support for the purpose from the decision in Surendra M. Khandhar vs. Asst. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 254 (Bom). We, accordingly, confirm the same, dismissing the assessee’s relevant ground. 9. The third and the final ground of appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 is qua an addition in the sum of Rs.3,60,000/- based on a seized document (Pg. 8 of Annexure A-3 to the Panchanama dated 06.01.2007/APB pg. 135). The same is in respect of notings in a diary bearing di…

CIT vs. Indeo Airways Pvt Ltd

ITA/1620/2010HC Delhi31 Aug 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 158B

…to be the same with regard to the material in respect of which it is drawn. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court reported as CIT v. Naresh Kumar Aggarwalla, 331 ITR 510; and that of the Bombay High Court in Surender M. Khandar v. ACIT, 321 ITR 254. 8. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of this Court reported as CIT v. Ravi Kant Jain, 250 ITR 141 for the submission that the scope of the block assessment is confined to the material found during the search. Reliance was lastly placed upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Ashim Krishna Mondal, 270 ITR 160.…

CIT vs. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd

ITA-1620/2010HC Delhi31 Aug 2012
Section 158B

…to be the same with regard to the material in respect of which it is drawn. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court reported as CIT v. Naresh Kumar Aggarwalla, 331 ITR 510; and that of the Bombay High Court in Surender M. Khandar v. ACIT, 321 ITR 254. 8. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of this Court reported as CIT v. Ravi Kant Jain, 250 ITR 141 for the submission that the scope of the block assessment is confined to the material found during the search. Reliance was lastly placed upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Ashim Krishna Mondal, 270 ITR 160.…

CIT vs. Indeo Airways Pvt Ltd

ITA - 1620 / 2010HC Delhi31 Aug 2012
Section 158B

…to be the same with regard to the material in respect of which it is drawn. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court reported as CIT v. Naresh Kumar Aggarwalla, 331 ITR 510; and that of the Bombay High Court in Surender M. Khandar v. ACIT, 321 ITR 254. 8. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of this Court reported as CIT v. Ravi Kant Jain, 250 ITR 141 for the submission that the scope of the block assessment is confined to the material found during the search. Reliance was lastly placed upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Ashim Krishna Mondal, 270 ITR 160.…