THE ASSISATANT COMMISSIOENR OF INCOME-TAX,, HOSHIARPUR vs. SH. MANINDER SINGH CHEEMA, HOSHIARPUR
In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed
ITA 719/ASR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08
Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69
…proved, the other considers them as not, i.e., on the parameters of section 68, (also) stated before us as not applicable to a trade credit - and which is what the earnest money essentially is, relying on the following decisions: CIT v. Bhital Das Modi [2005] 276 ITR 517 (All) CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain [2006] 156 Taxman 507 (All) ITO v. Lachhman Das Makhija [2009] 116 ITD 47 (Agra) (TM). 4.2 Even as observed by the Bench during hearing, whether in the given facts and circumstances, i.e., the explanation offered, and the materials led in support, could the ‘depositors’ be said to have deposited the earnest money,…