CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar

263 ITR 610High Court2003#427 most cited

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.

212

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 145(3) · addition restricted to profit · estimated profit · unaccounted receipts · on-money · bogus purchases · non-genuine sales · net profit rate · income estimation

Also reported as

135 Taxmann 180

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 132Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153ASection 145(3)Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 256(1)section 256on money receipton-moneyrejection of books of accountloose paperssection 145(3)survey under section 133asection 145section 132(4a)section 292cblock period

Judgments citing CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar

Mr. M.A. Siddique, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

ITA 66/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Neera Malhotra, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 34

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62 to 66/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2012-13 to 2016 – 17 Mr. M. A. Siddique, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, Vs. Mangaluru High Land, Falnir, Mangaluru – 575002. PAN : AKWPS8837R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.67 & 68/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 to 2016 – 17 Mr. Mohammed Safwan, S/o M. A. Siddique, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, Vs. Mangaluru Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, High Lan…

Mr. M.A. Siddique, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

ITA 65/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Neera Malhotra, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 34

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62 to 66/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2012-13 to 2016 – 17 Mr. M. A. Siddique, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, Vs. Mangaluru High Land, Falnir, Mangaluru – 575002. PAN : AKWPS8837R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.67 & 68/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 to 2016 – 17 Mr. Mohammed Safwan, S/o M. A. Siddique, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, Vs. Mangaluru Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, High Lan…

Mr. M.N. Siddique, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

ITA 64/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Neera Malhotra, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 34

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62 to 66/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2012-13 to 2016 – 17 Mr. M. A. Siddique, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, Vs. Mangaluru High Land, Falnir, Mangaluru – 575002. PAN : AKWPS8837R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.67 & 68/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 to 2016 – 17 Mr. Mohammed Safwan, S/o M. A. Siddique, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, Vs. Mangaluru Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, High Lan…

Mr. M.A. Siddique, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

ITA 63/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Neera Malhotra, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 34

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62 to 66/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2012-13 to 2016 – 17 Mr. M. A. Siddique, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, Vs. Mangaluru High Land, Falnir, Mangaluru – 575002. PAN : AKWPS8837R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.67 & 68/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 to 2016 – 17 Mr. Mohammed Safwan, S/o M. A. Siddique, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, Vs. Mangaluru Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, High Lan…

Mr. M. A. Siddique, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

ITA 62/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Neera Malhotra, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 34

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62 to 66/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2012-13 to 2016 – 17 Mr. M. A. Siddique, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, Vs. Mangaluru High Land, Falnir, Mangaluru – 575002. PAN : AKWPS8837R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.67 & 68/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 to 2016 – 17 Mr. Mohammed Safwan, S/o M. A. Siddique, DCIT, Central Circle – 1, Door No. 17 – 23 – 1625 – 2, Vs. Mangaluru Supreme Cottage, D’Silva Lane, High Lan…

ITO, Haryana vs. Sh. Darshan Lal Prop., Narnaul

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 4534/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh Dahiya, Sr. D.R
Section 68

…l. It goes to prove that purchases made on behalf of individual were also routed through the bank account of the assessee HUF. The Ld. CIT(A) further relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of CIT vs., Bal Chand Ajit Kumar 263 ITR 610 (M.P.) in which it was held that “Unrecorded sales found at the time of survey, net profit rate has to be applied. ” It is further noted in the impugned order that in the case of the assessee there is no difference in purchase and sales and the alleged difference in bank deposits and withdrawals is on account of purchases made on behalf of Indivi…

Crp Associates, Gandhinagar vs. The ACIT, Gandhinagar Cirle, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1901/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1901/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Crp Associates Acit, Gandhinagar Cir. 117, First Floor Vs Gandhinagar. Suman City, Sector 11 Gandhinagar 382 010. Pan : Aaffc 9454 R अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate Shri P.B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)

…) CIT vs. President Industries - 258 ITR 654 (Guj.); iii) CIT vs. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja - 302 ITR 63 (Guj); iv) CIT vs. Samir Synthetics Mill - 326 ITR 410 (Guj); v) Man Mohan Sadani vs. CIT - (2008) 304 ITR 52 (MP); CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar - (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) vi) 5. In his next fold of contentions, he submitted that this amount would become part of the business income, and accordingly, partners are entitled for remuneration as well as interest against this amount. He pointed out that this aspect was pleaded before the ld.CIT(A) wherein the assessee has highlighted the following facts: Page no.5…

Mangals Builders Associates, Paradeep vs. Principal CIT, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 294/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CIT DR
Section 263

…ssessment order and directing the AO to add the entire undisclosed receipts of Rs.15,67,677/- as income of the assessee. 11. Ld counsel for the assessee submitted that as per the decision of Hon’ble M.P.High Court in the case of CIT vs Balchand Ajit Kumar, 263 ITR 610 (MP), the undisclosed credit sales does not represent the profit of the assessee, therefore, the addition cannot be made on entire sale but only the net profit element has to be adopted for the purpose of taxation in the hands of the assessee. Ld counsel also placed reliance on the order of the ITAT, Cuttack Bench in the case of R.R.Carrying Co…

M/S. Grand Lilly Motels Ltd, Jalandhar vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax, Range-3, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 669/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A Nos.667 To 669 /Asr/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Ys.:2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" M/S. Grand Lilly Motels Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 4, Model Town, Jalandhar Income Tax, Pan: Aabcj 4527 E Circle- Iii, Jalandhar अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"Appellant अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" ""यथ"

…uld have been considered for addition. In support of this contention the counsel has relied on following case laws : Manmohan Sadani v. CIT [2008] 304 ITR 52 (MP), CIT v. President Industries [2002] 258 ITR 654 (Gujarat) , CIT v. Balchnad Ajit Kumar [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP) 10. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the AO has estimated sales based on consumption. However, where sale of finish goods sales are estimated, then there would be manufacturing expenses the entire sales a…

M/S Grand Lilly Limited, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 667/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A Nos.667 To 669 /Asr/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Ys.:2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" M/S. Grand Lilly Motels Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 4, Model Town, Jalandhar Income Tax, Pan: Aabcj 4527 E Circle- Iii, Jalandhar अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"Appellant अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" ""यथ"

…uld have been considered for addition. In support of this contention the counsel has relied on following case laws : Manmohan Sadani v. CIT [2008] 304 ITR 52 (MP), CIT v. President Industries [2002] 258 ITR 654 (Gujarat) , CIT v. Balchnad Ajit Kumar [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP) 10. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the AO has estimated sales based on consumption. However, where sale of finish goods sales are estimated, then there would be manufacturing expenses the entire sales a…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Surat vs. M/S. Anupam Organiser, Surat

In the result, Ground No.1 of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2036/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2036/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of V Anupam Organiser, Income Tax, S. F.P.No.12/13, Tp No.37, Central Circle-4, Surat. Nr. Bhumi Residency, Althan, Surat. [Pan: Aarfa 6954 C] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay –Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri Sreenivas T.Bidari - Cit-Dr

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…hhan Singh J. Juneja [2008] 302 ITR 63 (GUJ.) b. CIT vs. Samir Synthetics Mill [2010] 326 ITR 410 (GUJ.) c. CIT v. President Industries [2002] 258 ITR 654 (Guj.) d. Dy. CIT vs. Panna Corporation [2012] 74 DTR 89 (Guj-HC) e. CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar [MP HC] 263 ITR 610. f. CIT vs. Samir Synthetics Mill [2010] 326 ITR 410 (Guj) g. CIT vs. President Industries (Guj HC), 258 ITR h. Mohan Sadhani Vs. CIT 304 ITR 52 (MP) i. Agrawal Motors Vs ACIT68 ITD 407 (Jab), j. Sharda Real Estate Pnt.Ltd., ... vs A CIT, Ujjian (Judgment dated 21 August, 2012) ITAT, Indore Bench I.T(SS).A.Nos. I l l , 112 & 189/lnd/2012 A.Ys. :…

Satya Prakash Sharma, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT, Kolkata - 12, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2576/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. Nos. 2574 to 2576/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Satya Prakash Sharma Pr. CIT-12 C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates, Kolkata. Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Vs. Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069. (PAN: ALSPS 5479 C) Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Adv. For the Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 24.10.2019 Date of Pronounceme…

Satya Prakash Sharma, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT, Kolkata - 12, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2575/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. Nos. 2574 to 2576/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Satya Prakash Sharma Pr. CIT-12 C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates, Kolkata. Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Vs. Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069. (PAN: ALSPS 5479 C) Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Adv. For the Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 24.10.2019 Date of Pronounceme…

Satya Prakash Sharma, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT, Kolkata - 12, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2574/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. Nos. 2574 to 2576/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 Satya Prakash Sharma Pr. CIT-12 C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates, Kolkata. Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Vs. Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069. (PAN: ALSPS 5479 C) Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Adv. For the Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 24.10.2019 Date of Pronounceme…

M/S. Shiv Pujan Developers, Kalol vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Mehsana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 399/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2012-13 M/S.Shiv Pujan Develpers Ito, Ward-3 Mehsana. C/O. Jigneshkuamr Purushottambhai Vs. Patel, Abf-12, First Floor, Shivam Plaza Borisana Three Road Opp: Borisana Petrol Pump Kalol (N.G.)-382 721. Pan : Abtfs 2833 H

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)

…be treated as income of the assessee. For buttressing this contention, he relied upon the following decisions: i) DCIT Vs. Panna Corporation, Tax Appeal No.323 of 2000 (Guj) ii) CIT Vs. President Industries, 258 IR 654 (Guj) iii) CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar, 263 ITR 610 (MP) iv) Man Mohan Sadani Vs. CIT, 304 ITR 52 (MP) 4 5. In order to demonstrate the amount requires to be added back or quantification of the profit involved in the alleged on-money, he submitted that the assessee-firm has started its business from the Asstt.Year 2011-12 to 2016-17. The turnover and profit ratio has been compiled in tabular form,…

Income Tax Officer-11(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Western Imaginary Transcon Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4929/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Bhavesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Satyanathan Raju (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 68

…re the AO and there is a reconciliation wherein sales were backed by purchases. The assessee also relied upon certain case laws , detailed hereunder:- (i) CIT v. President Industries (2002) 258 ITR 654 (Guj.) (HC) (655) (ii) CIT v. Balachand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) (HC) (612-613) (iii) Sanjeev Woolen Mills v. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 434 (SC) It was also submitted that these purchases were duly accounted for in the books of accounts of the assessee and payments were made through banking channel. The assessee relied upon decision of ITAT, Ahemdabad in the case of General Mechanical Works v. ACIT , dated 14.03…

The Income Tax Officer, Jammu vs. Sh. Sudershan Kumar Sharma, Jammu

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 194/ASR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 194/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Charan Dass (Sr. D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Parveen Jain (Adv.)
Section 143(3)

…en as held by the Tribunal in Sarwan Kumar Sharma v. ITO (in ITA No. 2302/Ahd/2011). 3. Before us, it was argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee, Sh. Jain, relying CIT v. President Industries [2002] 258 ITR 654 (Guj) and CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP) that the entire receipt could not be regarded as undisclosed income, and that it is only the profit embedded in the sale receipt which could be regarded as income and subject to tax, and toward which the first 3 ITO v. Sudershan Kumar Sharma appellate authority had made a reasonable estimate at 8%. The ld. senior Departmental Representativ…

Shri Khanchand D. Dodeja, Akola vs. I.T.O. Ward -1, Akola

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 335/NAG/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 May 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C.J. ThakarFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Baral
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…re amount credited in the bank account of assessee. At the most the addition of profit segment could have been made by the authorities below. The ld. AR in support of his contentions placed reliance on the following decisions : i. CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar, 263 ITR 610 (MP); ii. CIT Vs. President Industries, 258 ITR 654 (Guj.); iii. G.N. Mohan Raju Vs. I.T.O., 217 ITR 4 (Gauhati); iv. Prabhudas Jagjiwandas Vs. I.T.O., 55 ITR 1 (Guj.). 4. On the other hand Shri R.K. Baral representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. DR submitted that the assessee did not co-operate with Assessing…

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1307/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

….T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar reported in [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP), & Man Mohan Sadani vs. CIT reported in [2008] 304 ITR 52 (MP) for the same proposition. 6.1. The ld. D/R could not cite before this Bench any contrary judgment. Under these circumstances, we apply the proposition of law laid down in the judgments of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court, referred above, an…

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1306/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

….T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar reported in [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP), & Man Mohan Sadani vs. CIT reported in [2008] 304 ITR 52 (MP) for the same proposition. 6.1. The ld. D/R could not cite before this Bench any contrary judgment. Under these circumstances, we apply the proposition of law laid down in the judgments of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court, referred above, an…