What is CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar authority for?

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar?

212 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar (263 ITR 610), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 132, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 148, Section 153A.

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar (263 ITR 610)

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Atri Developers, Ahmedabad

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2855/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, Cir.3(3) M/S.Atri Developers Ahmedabad. Vs 19, Ambalal House Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Atri Developers The Dcit, Cir.3(3) 19, Ambalal House Vs Ahmedabad. Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr.DR

Section 133ASection 250

…leged receipt of On-Money what can be taxed is only the net profit and not the entire amount of alleged receipts. For this proposition, the Appellant has further relied upon following decisions: Industries - 258 ITR 654 (Guj) (ii) CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar - 263 ITR 610 (MP) (iii) Man Mohan Sadani v. CIT-304 ITR 52 (MP) (iv) Kishor Mohanlal Telwala V. ACIT. 64 TTJ 543 (Ahd.) I have gone through the above decision in reference to case before me. The Appellant has further relied upon following decisions of Ahmedabad Tribunal, wherein it has been held that where it is found that the appellant is charging "On-Money"…

Harisons Steel Limited, Wada Thane vs. Dy CIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3957/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Biswanath Das

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…wed or addition should be restricted to the profits embodied on sale proceeds was answered by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. President Industries (258 ITR 654)and Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (263 ITR 610). Considering the above decisions, it is clear that only the profits embodied on sale proceeds should be taxed instead of addition on account of entire purchases. Looking to the circumstantial evidence in the present case, it is evident that impugned purchases from the alleged supplier was not genuine and such purchase was actually made from open…

Harisons Steel Ltd, Wada Thane vs. DCIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3943/MUM/2023[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Biswanath Das

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…wed or addition should be restricted to the profits embodied on sale proceeds was answered by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. President Industries (258 ITR 654)and Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (263 ITR 610). Considering the above decisions, it is clear that only the profits embodied on sale proceeds should be taxed instead of addition on account of entire purchases. Looking to the circumstantial evidence in the present case, it is evident that impugned purchases from the alleged supplier was not genuine and such purchase was actually made from open…

Navin Kumar Jain, Indore vs. ITO ACIT Dycit Faceless Assessment, Indore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 469/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 148

…ITANo.468 & 469/Ind/2023 1 Navin Kumar Jain आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.468 & 469/Ind/2023 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Navin Kumar Jain ITO, NFAC Prop. Navin Garments Delhi 147, J.S. Readymade Market Vs. Imli Bazar Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ABTPJ1442M Assessee by Shri Gagan Tiwari, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.05.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, J…

Navin Kumar Jain, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer Faceless Assessment Centre, Indore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 468/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 148

…ITANo.468 & 469/Ind/2023 1 Navin Kumar Jain आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.468 & 469/Ind/2023 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Navin Kumar Jain ITO, NFAC Prop. Navin Garments Delhi 147, J.S. Readymade Market Vs. Imli Bazar Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ABTPJ1442M Assessee by Shri Gagan Tiwari, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.05.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, J…

Dilip Kumar Jain, Ramganjmandi vs. Assistant Commissioner, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 180/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hearing.” 3. Succinctly, The Fact As Culled Out From The Records Is That Assessee Is An Individual & Derives Income From Business, Agriculture & Other

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…x Act is the profit and gains of a year. What is chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act is not the gross receipts, but income. Under the Income Tax Act, the tax is on income and not on gross receipts.” (2) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Balchand Ajitkumar 263 ITR 610 (2003) Hon’ble MP High Court The Hon’ble High Court held that total sale cannot be regarded as the profit of the assessee. The net profit rate has to be adopted and once a net profit rate is adopted, it cannot be said that there is perversity of approach. Whether the rate is low or high, it would depend upon the facts of each case. In the presen…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vijay Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 638/BANG/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vinod Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 637/BANG/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vinod Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 636/BANG/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

Shreem Soil Development Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1557/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 132Section 143(3)

…ts grounds submitted that the entire on-money is taxed by the Ld. Assessing Officer whereas the profit element at 8% embedded therein is only taxable in the hands of the assessee and relied upon following case laws: (i) CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar reported in 263 ITR 610 (MP) (ii) CIT vs. Samir Synthetics Mill (Guj.) reported in LAWS(GJH)- 2008-1-225 (iii) DCIT vs. Panna Corporation in Tax Appeal No. 323 of 2000 vide judgment dated 16.06.2012 (Guj.) (iv) CIT vs. Abhishek Corporation LAWS(GJH)-2014-11-28 (Guj.) (v) Sampada Homes Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 95 to 97/Hyd/2018 dated 07.09.2018 (ITAT Hyderabad) (vi) Sri Sri E…

Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)(3), Surat

ITA 250/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.190 to 191/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 to 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAOCS4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.250/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Th…

Shrifal Impex Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)(3), Surat

ITA 191/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.190 to 191/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 to 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAOCS4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.250/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Th…

Shrifal Impex Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)(3), Surat

ITA 190/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.190 to 191/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 to 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAOCS4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.250/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The ITO, No.504, 5th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Th…

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Jabalpur vs. Shri Deepak Jaiswal, Jabalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee on this ground is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/JAB/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 68

…he relevant portion from head note is reproduced hereinafter:- "Income-Addition—Undisclosed sales-Entire sale proceeds of the assessee cannot be added to his income Net profit rate has to be applied—CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2004) 186 CTR (MP) 419 : (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) followed " In the case of M/s Ramesh Chand Ravindra Kumar Rai v ITO, (2010)14 ITJ 34 the Hon'ble ITAT Jabalpur bench has held that if the books of accounts of an assessee having dealing in liquor is rejected then the estimation of the net profit @1.5% is reasonable. The relevant portion from the order of Hon'ble ITAT Jabalpur Bench is reprod…

Dinesh Kumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO-22(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 373/JODH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Section 143

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH ‘DB’: JODHPUR (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sh. Dinesh Kumar Jain Income Tax Officer, C/o Ashok Kumar 22(1)(2) Bansal, Vs. Mumbai Chartered Accountant Agarwal Colony Balotra-344 022 PAN-AEUPJ 5128E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Mr. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing 22/09/2023 Date of Pronouncement 27/10/2023 ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM: This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against order dated 27/08/2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of…