CIT v. Roshan Lal Seth

178 ITR 660High Court1989#11977 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Also reported as

45 Taxmann 187

Judgments citing CIT v. Roshan Lal Seth

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1437/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2013-14
Section 69

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 1434/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 1435/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 1436/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1437/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. ACIT, CC-8(4) Shri Mohan Thakur 4, Flora Villa, 35, St. 6th Floor Andrews Road, Bandra(W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400 050. M.K. Road Churchgate PAN : AAAPT2966N Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivram Department by Shri Bharat Anohle Date of Hearing 01.03.2021 Date of Pronouncemen…

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1436/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2012-13
Section 69

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 1434/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 1435/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 1436/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1437/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. ACIT, CC-8(4) Shri Mohan Thakur 4, Flora Villa, 35, St. 6th Floor Andrews Road, Bandra(W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400 050. M.K. Road Churchgate PAN : AAAPT2966N Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivram Department by Shri Bharat Anohle Date of Hearing 01.03.2021 Date of Pronouncemen…

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1435/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2011-12
Section 69

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 1434/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 1435/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 1436/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1437/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. ACIT, CC-8(4) Shri Mohan Thakur 4, Flora Villa, 35, St. 6th Floor Andrews Road, Bandra(W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400 050. M.K. Road Churchgate PAN : AAAPT2966N Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivram Department by Shri Bharat Anohle Date of Hearing 01.03.2021 Date of Pronouncemen…

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1434/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2009-10
Section 69

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 1434/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 1435/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 1436/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1437/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. ACIT, CC-8(4) Shri Mohan Thakur 4, Flora Villa, 35, St. 6th Floor Andrews Road, Bandra(W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400 050. M.K. Road Churchgate PAN : AAAPT2966N Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivram Department by Shri Bharat Anohle Date of Hearing 01.03.2021 Date of Pronouncemen…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. SHRI SANJAY GOSWAMI, GUWAHATI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 80/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14 Dcit, Circle-3 V/S. Shri Sanjay Goswami Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Sarumatoria, Dispur, Floor, G.S. Road, Guwahati-781002 Guwahatii-781005 [Pan No.Aelpg 5124 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…f cost. There is no material either on record or otherwise to show that the appellant invested more than what was shown by him in his return of income. In support of our above contention, reliance is placed on the following case law: - CIT vs. Roshan Lal Seth 178 ITR 660 (P&H) 7.2 I haves considered the sub missions made before me. Io haves also gone through the assessment order and the remand report sent by the Assessing Officer. In his remand report the Assessing Officer has reiterated what has been mentioned in the assessment order. He has however, stated that he has no objection to the admission of fresh or a…

SH. DEEN DAYAL GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2598/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Yogendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68Section 69

…fail to understand that when entries are found to be genuine in the books of the other parties, how revenue can take a different stand for taxing the same transaction in the hands of the assessee. It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Roshan Lal Seth – 178 ITR 660 that where a deposit stands in the name of the third person, even that person related to the assessee, the assessee cannot call upon to explain such deposit. In such a case, the proper course is that either the person in whose books the deposit appears or the person in whose name the deposit stands should be called upon to explain the deposit. I…

SH. DEEN DAYAL GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 2597/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Yogendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68Section 69

…fail to understand that when entries are found to be genuine in the books of the other parties, how revenue can take a different stand for taxing the same transaction in the hands of the assessee. It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Roshan Lal Seth – 178 ITR 660 that where a deposit stands in the name of the third person, even that person related to the assessee, the assessee cannot call upon to explain such deposit. In such a case, the proper course is that either the person in whose books the deposit appears or the person in whose name the deposit stands should be called upon to explain the deposit. I…

DEEN DAYAL GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 1598/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Yogendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68Section 69

…fail to understand that when entries are found to be genuine in the books of the other parties, how revenue can take a different stand for taxing the same transaction in the hands of the assessee. It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Roshan Lal Seth – 178 ITR 660 that where a deposit stands in the name of the third person, even that person related to the assessee, the assessee cannot call upon to explain such deposit. In such a case, the proper course is that either the person in whose books the deposit appears or the person in whose name the deposit stands should be called upon to explain the deposit. I…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI DEEN DAYAL GOEL, NEW DELHI

ITA 1363/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Yogendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68Section 69

…fail to understand that when entries are found to be genuine in the books of the other parties, how revenue can take a different stand for taxing the same transaction in the hands of the assessee. It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Roshan Lal Seth – 178 ITR 660 that where a deposit stands in the name of the third person, even that person related to the assessee, the assessee cannot call upon to explain such deposit. In such a case, the proper course is that either the person in whose books the deposit appears or the person in whose name the deposit stands should be called upon to explain the deposit. I…

CIT v. Roshan Lal Seth (178 ITR 660) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax