CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi

Shri Janak Goel, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result all, the grounds of appeal raised in the appeal memo as well as the additional ground raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary

…ited in the books of accounts of the assessee and hence, the addition made u/s 68 of the income tax act stands vitiated and therefore it should be deleted. The first judicial precedent in this controversy is the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in 141 ITR 67, wherein it has been held that that when monies are deposited in bank account, relationship that is constituted between the bank and the customer is of creditor and not the trustee and beneficiary. Therefore, it is not as if the bank passbook is maintained by the bank as an agent of the customer, nor can it be said that the passbook is maintained…

Sh. Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 1808/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Vs Acit, S/O Phool Chand Yadav, 401, Circle-35(1), Mahavirjee Complex, Rishabh New Delhi Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahpy8780E Assessee By : Sh. Anil Kumar Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.04.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Xix, New Delhi Dated 06.01.2015. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “(1) Id. Cit(Appeals) Has Unfairly Upheld The Double Taxation Of Rs. 19.00.000/- Which Was Cash Deposit Into Bank Whereas In The Original Computation Of Income Assessee Included The Income Of Rs. 19,00,000 As Cash Credit Into Bank. (2) Id. Cit(Appeals) Has Unfairly Upheld The Addition Of Rs. 19,00.000/- (Against The Duly Declared Agriculture Income Of Rs. 20,00,000/-) Treated Them As Undisclosed Income U/S 68 Of The Act In The Impugned Order U/S 143(3) Whereas Only Rs. 1,00,000/- Has Been Allowed As Agricultural Income. The Appellant/Assessee Prays For Grant Of Permission To Add/Insert/Alter/ Modify/Rectify Any Part Of The Above 2 Jitendra Kumar Yadav Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Either Before Or During The Course Of Hearing Of This Appeal.” 3. In Ground No. 1 Of The Appeal, The Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.19,00,000/- On Account Of Cash Deposit In Bank Account.

…d in law as the pre-condition for invoking Section 68 of the Act is a credit must be found of that amount in the books of account of the assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Nitin Agarwal (HUF), Kailash Prasad Agarwal (HUF) and Manish Agarwal (HUF) Vs ITO in ITA Nos. 7309, 7310 & 7443/Del/2018, order dated 11.01.2019. 20. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. However, the Departmental Represen…

ACIT, Circle- 50(1), New Delhi vs. Deepa Kapoor, Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-2013 Deepa Kapoor, Vs. Acit, 5, Arjun Marg, Dlf Circle-50(1), Phase-1, New Delhi. Gurgaon (Haryana). Pan: Abgpk6496F Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Acit, Vs. Deepa Kapoor, Circle-50(1), 5, Arjun Marg, Dlf New Delhi. Phase-1, Gurgaon (Haryana). Pan: Abgpk6496F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Shri P. Roy Chaudhary, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2018 Order Per Bench: Challenging The Order Dated 22.05.2017 Passed In A.No.198/2016-17 By The Cit(A)-17, New Delhi, Both The Assessee

…e bank passbook in relation to the account of the assessee is not maintained by the assessee and, therefore, section 68 cannot be applied to the entries in the bank passbook as has been held in Mayawati vs. DCIT 113 TTJ (Del.) 178, CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom.), ITO vs. Kamal Kumar Mishra 33 taxmann.com 610 (Lucknow-Trib.) and Roopak Jain vs. ITO (Del ITAT, ITA No.5592/D/2015, dated 30.08.2016). 10. Third limb of the argument of the ld. AR is that the only provision available in the Income-tax Act to deal with the advances received for sale of property is section 51 which says that where any capi…

Deepa Kapoor, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 50(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-2013 Deepa Kapoor, Vs. Acit, 5, Arjun Marg, Dlf Circle-50(1), Phase-1, New Delhi. Gurgaon (Haryana). Pan: Abgpk6496F Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Acit, Vs. Deepa Kapoor, Circle-50(1), 5, Arjun Marg, Dlf New Delhi. Phase-1, Gurgaon (Haryana). Pan: Abgpk6496F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Shri P. Roy Chaudhary, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2018 Order Per Bench: Challenging The Order Dated 22.05.2017 Passed In A.No.198/2016-17 By The Cit(A)-17, New Delhi, Both The Assessee

…e bank passbook in relation to the account of the assessee is not maintained by the assessee and, therefore, section 68 cannot be applied to the entries in the bank passbook as has been held in Mayawati vs. DCIT 113 TTJ (Del.) 178, CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom.), ITO vs. Kamal Kumar Mishra 33 taxmann.com 610 (Lucknow-Trib.) and Roopak Jain vs. ITO (Del ITAT, ITA No.5592/D/2015, dated 30.08.2016). 10. Third limb of the argument of the ld. AR is that the only provision available in the Income-tax Act to deal with the advances received for sale of property is section 51 which says that where any capi…

Mr. Jagat Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

…hat the CIT (A) has further failed to appreciate that section 68 of the Act is applicable only where there are credits in the books of the assessee and not elsewhere. In fact the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi reported in 141 ITR 67 have held that even the bank account of the assessee is not the books of the assessee and had thus deleted the addition by holding that section 68 of the Act is inapplicable. Further the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi vs CIT reported in 171 ITR 532 have held that even the balance sheet is not the books of the asse…

Mr. Jagat Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

…hat the CIT (A) has further failed to appreciate that section 68 of the Act is applicable only where there are credits in the books of the assessee and not elsewhere. In fact the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi reported in 141 ITR 67 have held that even the bank account of the assessee is not the books of the assessee and had thus deleted the addition by holding that section 68 of the Act is inapplicable. Further the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi vs CIT reported in 171 ITR 532 have held that even the balance sheet is not the books of the asse…

Mr. Jagat Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

…hat the CIT (A) has further failed to appreciate that section 68 of the Act is applicable only where there are credits in the books of the assessee and not elsewhere. In fact the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi reported in 141 ITR 67 have held that even the bank account of the assessee is not the books of the assessee and had thus deleted the addition by holding that section 68 of the Act is inapplicable. Further the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi vs CIT reported in 171 ITR 532 have held that even the balance sheet is not the books of the asse…

Mr. Jagat Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleita No. 3037/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2005-06) Ita No. 3039/Del/2015 ( A.Y 2007-08)

…hat the CIT (A) has further failed to appreciate that section 68 of the Act is applicable only where there are credits in the books of the assessee and not elsewhere. In fact the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi reported in 141 ITR 67 have held that even the bank account of the assessee is not the books of the assessee and had thus deleted the addition by holding that section 68 of the Act is inapplicable. Further the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi vs CIT reported in 171 ITR 532 have held that even the balance sheet is not the books of the asse…

Smt Arti Sharma, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Arti Sharma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O- Kunal Aggarwal & Ward-3(3), Gurgaon Associates, 2Nd Floor Jmd Megapolis, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon Pan :Bexps5432Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Arti Sharma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o- Kunal Aggarwal & Ward-3(3), Gurgaon Associates, 2nd Floor JMD Megapolis, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon PAN :BEXPS5432Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Kunal Aggarwal, CA Department by Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR Date of hearing 31.07.2018 Date of pronouncement 20.09.2018 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 09/02/2017 passed by the Ld. Commiss…

Achla Dhawan vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ceived u/s 68 of the Act was totally absent in the case. In point of fact the assessee had not maintained any books of account and in the absence of any books of accounts, Section 68 of the Act has no application. Please see CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bom). 11. The message as conveyed to the Assessing Officer as to escapement of income of the assessee is not based on any material. The note referring to the communication of the Meerut investigation Wing has no relevant bearing with the formation of the belief as to escapement of income by the Assessee's Officer in this case. None has been estab…