CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)

DCIT Central 2, Indore vs. M/S Gautamswami Enterprises, Indore

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2012-13

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING Assessment Year 2012-13 DCIT, (Central-2) Indore : Appellant V/s M/s. Gautamswani Enterprises Indore : Respondent PAN AAIFG3350K Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka, & Venus Rawka, ARs Date of Hearing 11.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement 23.08.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2012-13 is directed…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Visakhapatnam vs. Manchukonda Shyam, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.87/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Manchukonda Shyam Income Tax Prop : Manchukonda Shyam Central Circle-1 Zaveri, D.No.10-1-27, Visakhapatnam Near Sampath Vinayaka Temple Asilmetta Visakhapatnam [Pan : Afqpm0217A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.14/Viz/2020 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.87/Viz/2020) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) Shri Manchukonda Shyam Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Prop : Manchukonda Shyam Income Tax Zaveri, D.No.10-1-27, Central Circle-1 Near Sampath Vinayaka Temple Visakhapatnam Asilmetta, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Afqpm0217A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 23.09.2020 Pronouncement

…Savjtri Devi Vs ACIT ITTA 563 of 2017 (AP)(HC) ii) Jawahar Bhai Atmaram Hathiwala Vs ITO 128 ITJ 36 (Ahd) iii) iv) DCIT Vs B. Vijaya Kumar ITA No.930 & 931 of 2009 (Hyd). CIT Vs R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P) v) vi) CIT Vs P. V Kalyana Sundaran (2007) 294 ITR 49 vii)i. Venkata Rama Sai Developers Vs DCIT ITA 453/Vizag/2012. P.Venkateshwar Rao Vs DCIT ITA 25/825/Vizag/2012 vii) The ratio laid down is that solely on the basis evidences such as notings in loose sheets found with third parties and the statement of third 11 I.T.A. No.87/Viz/2020 and CO No.14/Viz/2020, A.Y.2016-17 Manchukonda Shyam, Visakhapat…

Navneet Jhamb vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Faridabad

The appeals are allowed

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

…t the burden of proving is that of Revenue when there is allegation of understatement on concealment in the consideration shown. 6.4 We also place reliance upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. P. V. Kalyanasundaram in (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC) in which allegations of on money transaction on the basis of non-convincing loose sheets found during the course of search and conflicting statement of the seller, was deleted by the Tribunal (to which, one of us the Accountant Member was the party) and the same was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Apex Court.” 8. While…

Shrimati Harmohinder Kaur, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Officer Central Circle-II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiassessment Year: 2009-10

…s allegation of understatement on concealment in the consideration shown. Here we find that revenue has failed to discharge the burden cast on it. 19. We also place reliance from the Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Kalyansundaram in (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC) in which allegations of on money transaction on the basis of non-convincing loose sheets found during the course of search and conflicting statement of the seller, was deleted by the Tribunal and the same was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Apex Court.” 8. Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sh. Parve…

Karuturi Vijaya Bharathi, Guntur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blesmt. Karuturi Vijaya Bharathi, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), D.No. 1-2-8, Presidency Guntur. Apartment, 1St Floor, 1St Line, Jkc Nagar, Guntur. Pan No. Blupk 0068 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…that the price of the property is more than mentioned in the sale deed. There must be some material and basis to conclude that the purchase has been made at an under valuation.” 23. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49, under the similar circumstances held in favour of the assessee. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding the issue in favour of the assessee held as under: “We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. It is true that the Division Bench of the High Court has borrowed extensively from the orders of the Tribunal…