CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary

305 ITR 245High Court2008#1194 most cited

What is CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary authority for?

Denial by the assessee in a search situation regarding payments made for agricultural land, evidenced by MOUs, does not preclude the Assessing Officer from adding such amounts under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as unexplained money.

95

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary · section 69 · section 132 · search and seizure · unexplained money · agricultural land · memorandum of understanding · addition · denial by assessee · Income-tax Act 1961

Also reported as

169 Taxmann 130214 CTR 51

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 132Section 292CSection 153ASection 69CSection 133ASection 153C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153(c)(1)section 127(1)abatement of assessmentsection 94peak credit theorysection 153(c)transferee companysection 132(4a)section 131(1a)section 292csection 114section 153a(1)(b)

Judgments citing CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary

M/S Rainbow Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1745/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 766/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 ITA No. 1745/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/s Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd., Vs ACIT, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Central Circle-23, Circus, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACR5368R ITA No. 1678/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 ACIT, Vs M/s Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught New Delhi Circus, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT)…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Rainbow Promoter (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1678/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 766/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 ITA No. 1745/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/s Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd., Vs ACIT, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Central Circle-23, Circus, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACR5368R ITA No. 1678/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 ACIT, Vs M/s Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught New Delhi Circus, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT)…

ACIT, Central Circle-04, New Delhi vs. Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad

ITA 9449/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

ACIT, Central Circle-04, New Delhi vs. Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad

ITA 9448/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9152/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9151/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9150/DEL/2019[2014-1]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9149/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9148/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Vishnu Kumar Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 9147/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…n and there is no other corroborative evidence or material before the A.O, the addition on account of interest received is not justified. 21.3. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 he submitted that when both the parties are denying to have entered into the transaction, then no addition could be made, in absence of corroborative evidence as the presumption under section 132(4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is a rebuttal one. 21.4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the search party has not found any unrecorded…

Charminar Bottling Company Private Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1344/HYD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07 Charminar Bottling Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Company Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Secunderabad. Circle – 8(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabcc2858E (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee By: Smt. Kanika Jain Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar Date Of Hearing: 08/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/05/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee For Ay 2006-07 Is Directed Against The Cit(A) - Iii, Hyderabad’S Order, Dated 12/07/2013 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ; In Short “The Act”.

For Appellant: Smt. Kanika JainFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 143(3)Section 69

…nd Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT, Bihar and Orissa (1959) 371TR 288 (refer to judgment compendium page 162-163 para 25-27) b. Omar Salay Mohommed v. CIT, Madras (1959) 37 ITR 151 (refer to judgment compendium page 180 para 33) c. CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary (2008)305 ITR 245 (refer to judgment compendium page 182 para 4, page183-184 para 11) 4. The addition is based on the assumption that since the contents of the loose sheet coincide with 6 I.T.A. No. 1344/Hyd/2013 Charminar Bottling Company Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. the Registered Agreement for Sale without possession dated 01.12.2005 in respect of cheques payment, then ne…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6343/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 6343/Del/2013: Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Vs M/s Countrywide Promoters Tax, Central Circle-23, Pvt. Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, New Delhi-110055 Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANTT (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACC5280H ITA No. 6304/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, Tax, Central Circle-23, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT…

Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6304/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. K. N. Chary, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 6343/Del/2013: Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Vs M/s Countrywide Promoters Tax, Central Circle-23, Pvt. Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, New Delhi-110055 Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANTT (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACC5280H ITA No. 6304/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, Tax, Central Circle-23, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT…

ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi vs. Kuber Khadyan Pvt. Ltd., New Dlehi

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4226/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…employee of the assessee company. He further submitted that statement/surrender by third-party is not binding on the assessee. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ved Prakash Choudhary, 305 ITR 245 (Del). He further submitted that the statement of alleged entry-providers, which had been referred by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, were recorded much prior to the date of the search and despite a specific request by the assessee, the Assessing Officer failed to provide opportunity to cross examine those persons namely Sh. Vikas…

ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi vs. Kuber Khadyan Pvt. Ltd., New Dlehi

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4223/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…employee of the assessee company. He further submitted that statement/surrender by third-party is not binding on the assessee. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ved Prakash Choudhary, 305 ITR 245 (Del). He further submitted that the statement of alleged entry-providers, which had been referred by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, were recorded much prior to the date of the search and despite a specific request by the assessee, the Assessing Officer failed to provide opportunity to cross examine those persons namely Sh. Vikas…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1470/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…IT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 282 ITR 259, which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 and the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ajay Gupta vs. CIT reported in 185 DTR 217 following his earlier decision in CIT vs. Shadiram Ganga Prasad reported in (2010) UPTC 840. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SM Agarwal reported in 293 ITR 43 held that no adverse inference can be drawn unless the author of the docum…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1469/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…IT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 282 ITR 259, which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 and the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ajay Gupta vs. CIT reported in 185 DTR 217 following his earlier decision in CIT vs. Shadiram Ganga Prasad reported in (2010) UPTC 840. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SM Agarwal reported in 293 ITR 43 held that no adverse inference can be drawn unless the author of the docum…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1468/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…IT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 282 ITR 259, which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ved Prakash Choudhary reported in 305 ITR 245 and the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ajay Gupta vs. CIT reported in 185 DTR 217 following his earlier decision in CIT vs. Shadiram Ganga Prasad reported in (2010) UPTC 840. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SM Agarwal reported in 293 ITR 43 held that no adverse inference can be drawn unless the author of the docum…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Rajesh Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 5364/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Shailesh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)

…o justification to make any addition against the assessee. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee has relied upon the following decisions. 6.1. Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT (Central)-1, New Delhi vs., Ved Prakash Choudhary [2008] 305 ITR 245 (Del.) in which in paras 12 to 15 the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held as under : “12. Insofar as the present case is concerned, the Assessee had stated that in fact there was no transfer of money between him and Ravi Talwar and Madhu Talwar. On the other hand, Ravi Talwar and Madhu Talwar had denied receipt of 11 ITA.No.5364/Del./2017 Mr. Rajesh G…

Adarsh Agrawal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 777/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Jain, C.A. And Shri Arpit Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “A”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.777/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 The Income Tax Officer, Shri Adarsh Agrawal, Ward-61(1), Room vs., N-57, Naveen Shahdra, No.2007, 20th Floor, E-2 Block, Civic Centre, Delhi. JLN Marg, PAN AACPA1775E New Delhi - 110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A. Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, For Assessee : Shri Deepesh Jain, C.A. And Shri Arpit Goel, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement…