CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah

Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon, Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, this appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon Dcit-1(1) M-4, Radio Colony, Bhopal बनाम Indore /Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aespj9459E Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri Aditya Shukla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

…material or evidence has been brought on record by the A.O to establish that the notices of jottings of loose sheets or on the paper written on accounted transactions cannot be made". Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CITV/s Maulikumar K Shah 2008 307 ITR 137 has held that "the additions made by the A.O on the basis of seized paper alone without any corroborative evidence could not be sustained". 6.4 Further, we find that the same issue has been dealt with by ITAT, Indore in the case of ACIT vs. Narottam Mishra (2018) 32 ITJ 510 (Trib.-Indore) wherein on the identical facts and circumstances, the Tri…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir.-2, Surat vs. Shri Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Bhadani, Surat

In the result, summarized and concise ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.25 &31/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Bhadani, Prop. Of M/S Rangeela Fashion, 14, Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No. 505, 5Th Floor, Nirman Industrial Estate, A.K. Road, Fulpada, Surat Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Vs. Surat-395001. Deputy Commissioner Of Income- Rameshbai Raghavhai Bhadani Plot No.14-16, Nirman Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No.505, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Industrial Estate, A./K. Road, Surat-395008 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adkpb 0556 F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.45/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rameshbhai Raghavbhai Income-Tax, Circle-3, Room No. Bhadani, Prop. Of M/S Rangeela Vs. 505, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Fashion, 14, Nirman Industrial Majura Gate, Surat-395001. Estate, A.K. Road, Fulpada, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adkpb 0556 F (Assessee) (Respondent)

…terial to show that huge cash was transferred from one side to another, the addition cannot be sustained.These case laws of Hon'ble Supreme Court have been relied upon by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Shri Mauli Kumar K. Shah (2008) 307 ITR 137 (Guj) and PCIT vs. Ajay Sundarbhai Patel (2016) 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj). These judgments of Hon'ble IT(SS)A Nos.25, 31, 45, 26 & 30/SRT/2021 A.Ys.13-14 & 14-15 Rameshbhai R Bhadani & Jayeshkumar D Mistry High Court of Gujarat and Hon'ble Supreme Court of India have been relied upon by Hon'ble ITAT Ahmedabad in several cases. The assessee’s case…

DCIT, Central Circle, Dehradun vs. Swarnganga Construction P.Ltd, Bhilwara

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Rao

…case ofCU vs. AtamValves(P.)Ltd.[2009] 184 Taxman 6 (Punjab & Haryana), c) A CIT vs. Sharad Chaudhary [2014] 165 TTJ 145 (Delhi - Trib.), d) Hon’ble Hyderabad Tribunal in the case ofGyankumar Agarwal(Ind.)[2012]146 TTJ334, e) CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah [2008] 307 ITR 137 7.3 In view of the above detailed discussions and considering the judicial pronouncements cited here-in-above, all the additions made by the AO are hereby deleted and grounds of appeal of the appellant are allowed.” 12. Once the assessee sought to file the additional evidence then the proper procedure is to first admit the additional evidences an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1 (1), Bhopal vs. Shri Neeraj Mandloi, New Delhi

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

…ssessee could not be rejected - Held yes. Whether addition made was on mere suspicion without any corroborative evidence and had to be deleted- Held yes. Shri Neeraj Mandloi ITA No.680/Ind/2020 & C.O.No.04/Ind/2020 33. In the case of CIT v. MaulikkumarK Shah 307 ITR 137 (Guj) , Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that additions made by the AO towards "on money" on the basis of seized paper alone without any corroborative evidence cannot be sustained. 34. Hon 'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. KulwantRai291 ITR 36 (Delhi) has held that no addition can be made based on surmises and guess work. 35. Hon'ble…