CIT v. JayabenRatilalSarothiya

174 TTJ 151Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#15104 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 153a(1)(a)section 144basection 56(2)(vii)(b)section 158bcsection 142(2a)statement under section 132(4)panchnamasection 127section 153bpenny stocksection 10(38)principal commissioner of income-tax

Judgments citing CIT v. JayabenRatilalSarothiya

Sachin Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 59/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…arty, that too on the basis of estimation/ extrapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-…

Kamal Kant Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 53/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…arty, that too on the basis of estimation/ extrapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-…

M/S Standard Frozen Foods Exports Pvt Ltd, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 45/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…arty, that too on the basis of estimation/ extrapolation. Reliance is placed on the followings decisions: i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s JayabenRatilalSarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). Standard Agro Vet Pvt Ltd- ITSSA 46-49/Lkw/2022 for AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 The appellant humbly submits before your honour that in the above appeal, the issue on account of which addition has been made by the ld.AO is on account of share application in the AY 2012-…

Matrix India Entertainment Consultants Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC -8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals for 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 &

ITA 2938/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ramlal Negi

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…n following cases it is held that estimation cannot be made for a different assessment year in respect of which there is no incriminating material namely CIT-1 v Jayaben Ratilal Sorathia (2014) 222 Taxman 64(Guj.) (Trib.) (Mag), Uday C Tamhankar v DCIT (2015) 174 TTJ 151(Mum)(Trib.), Dr M.K.E Memon (2008) 248 ITR 310 (Bom)(HC). Besides in the case .In Mehta Parikh & Co v CIT (1956) 30 ITR 181(SC), it is held that an Affidavit is valid unless proven false. The Supreme Court in Comman Cause v UOI [2017] [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) (Pg. No. 140-148) was dealing with incriminating materials in form of random sheets and l…

Piyush A. Vora, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3221/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhpiyush A. Vora Acit, Cc-47 52/5Th Floor, Kedia Apartment, Mumbai. Doongarshi Road, Malabar Hill, Vs Mumbai-400006 Pan:Ablpv6068P (Appellant) (Respondent) Piyush A. Vora Acit, Cc-47 52/5Th Floor, Kedia Apartment, Mumbai. Doongarshi Road, Malabar Hill, Vs. Mumbai-400006 Pan:Ablpv6068P (Appellant) (Respondent) Ta No.3223/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year- 2011-12) Piyush A. Vora Acit, Cc-47 52/5Th Floor, Kedia Apartment, Mumbai. Doongarshi Road, Malabar Hill, Vs. Mumbai-400006 Pan:Ablpv6068P (Appellant) (Respondent) Piyush A. Vora Acit, Cc-47 52/5Th Floor, Kedia Apartment, Mumbai. Doongarshi Road, Malabar Hill, Vs. Mumbai-400006 Pan:Ablpv6068P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash K. Jotwani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Virender Singh (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 253Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 80D

…see also substantiated the manner in which the said income was derived. In support of his submission the ld AR for the revenue relied on decision of Tribunal in Sunil Kumar Vs DCT [2015] 70 SOT137/62 taxmann.com 78(Chandigarh), Udai C.Tamhankar Vs DCIT (2015) 174 TTJ 151. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities below. The ld. DR further submits that despite disclosing the undisclosed income during the search on 26.05.2011, the assessee not included the said income in his return of income filed under section 139(4) on 30.03.2013. Had the search not took place at the premise…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 8(2), Mumbai vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3092/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Counsel a/wFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 132Section 153A

…support of his contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) Common Cause v/s Union Of India, 77 taxmann.com 245 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Jayaben Ratilal Sarothiya, 222 taxman 64 (Guj.); iii) Uday C. Thmhankan v/s DCIT, 174 TTJ 151 (Mum.); and iv) Dr. M.K.E. Menon, 248 ITR 310 (Bom.). 21 Ms. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte 38. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record in the light of the decisions relied upon. Undisputedly, on the basis of evaluation sheet found from the computer of Ms. Sandhya Ramchandra, the Assessing Officer has estimated i…

CIT v. JayabenRatilalSarothiya (174 TTJ 151) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax