Commissioner of Income Tax v. Prem Chand Jain

189 ITR 320High Court1991#10292 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Prem Chand Jain authority for?

The availability of undisclosed income from earlier years can be considered a fund from which subsequent expenses or credits may be drawn. However, this availability does not automatically imply that such a fund is the source of all unexplained expenditures or cash credits in later years.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Prem Chand Jain · 189 ITR 320 · undisclosed income · secret profits · source of unexplained expenditure · cash credits · Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT · 123 ITR 457

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 269SS

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(ia)percentage completion methodsection 142(2a)section 269sssection 271dsection 269section 17block periodsection 40a(3)on-moneysection 40asection 40(a)(ia)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Prem Chand Jain

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3662/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 153ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2818/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 2819/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] Mahagun India Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 Delhi New Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A ITA No. 3661/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 3662/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] The A.C.I.T Vs. Mahagun India Pvt Ltd B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 New Delhi Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3661/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 153ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2818/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 2819/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] Mahagun India Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 Delhi New Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A ITA No. 3661/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 3662/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] The A.C.I.T Vs. Mahagun India Pvt Ltd B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 New Delhi Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil…

Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2819/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 153ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2818/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 2819/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] Mahagun India Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 Delhi New Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A ITA No. 3661/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 3662/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] The A.C.I.T Vs. Mahagun India Pvt Ltd B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 New Delhi Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil…

Mahugun India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2818/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 153ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2818/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 2819/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] Mahagun India Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 Delhi New Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A ITA No. 3661/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2005-06] ITA No. 3662/DEL/2012 [A.Y. 2006-07] The A.C.I.T Vs. Mahagun India Pvt Ltd B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar Central Circle – 3 New Delhi Delhi PAN – AAACM 6572 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil…

Sh. Kirpal Singh, Kapurthala vs. The Income Tax Officer, Kapurthala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 167/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri L.P. Sahu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.167/Asr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sh. Kirpal Singh, Vs. Ito, Kapurthala-1, S/O Ravel Singh, Kapurthala H.No.644, Guru Nanak Nagar, Kapurthala स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Panno. : Bsyps 8252 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Vijh, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Vijh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(1)Section 69A

…al Chand reported at 165 ITR 453 held that benefit for the assessee could claim benefit for intangible additions made in several earlier years. Similar view has been expressed by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prem Chand Jain reported at 189 ITR 320. The Court has in fact held that the benefit of the past intangible additions in the case of the firm would be available in the hands of the partner for household expenses. The jurisdictional High Court has in the case of Shivcharan Dass vs. CIT reported at 126 ITR 263 held that where the amount was disclosed under VDIS and thereafter the amount…

Sanjeeb Kumar Singh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 40, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 946/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 24

…of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co Vs. CIT reported in 123 ITR 457 which was followed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court & Punjab & Haryana High Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Jawanmal Gemaji Gandhi reported in 151 ITR 353 and CIT Vs. Prem Chand Jain reported in 189 ITR 320 respectively wherein it was held as follows: “8. There can be no escape from the proposition that the secret profits or undisclosed income of an assessee earned in an earlier assessment year may constitute a fund, even though concealed, from which the assessee may draw subsequently for meeting expenditure or introducing amounts in his account bo…

ACIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. Vivek Rohatgi, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1437/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM and Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, AM ] I.TA No. 1293/Kol/2016 A.Y 2013-14 Vivek Rohatigi Vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle-1(2), PAN: ADRPR2276D Kolkata Appellant Respondent I.TA No. 1437/Kol/2016 A.Y 2013-14 A.C.I.T, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata Vs. Vivek Rohatigi PAN: ADRPR2276D Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 01-08-2019 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2019 For the Appellant Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri A.K. Nayak, CIT, ld.DR ORDER PER SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM The cross appeals, filed by the assessee a…

Vivek Rohatgi, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1293/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM and Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, AM ] I.TA No. 1293/Kol/2016 A.Y 2013-14 Vivek Rohatigi Vs. D.C.I.T, Central Circle-1(2), PAN: ADRPR2276D Kolkata Appellant Respondent I.TA No. 1437/Kol/2016 A.Y 2013-14 A.C.I.T, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata Vs. Vivek Rohatigi PAN: ADRPR2276D Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 01-08-2019 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2019 For the Appellant Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA, ld.AR For the Respondent Shri A.K. Nayak, CIT, ld.DR ORDER PER SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM The cross appeals, filed by the assessee a…

DCIT-Central Circle-Xxviii, Kolkata vs. Shri Chandra Prakash Banthia, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2404/KOL/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, ld. Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Upadhyay, Advocate, ld.AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co Vs. CIT reported in 123 ITR 457, which was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court & Punjab & Haryana High Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Jawanmal Gemaji Gandhi reported in 151 ITR 353 and CIT Vs. Prem Chand Jain reported in 189 ITR 320 respectively. Relevant portion of CIT-A order is reproduced herein below:- “11. I also find merit and substance in the alternate submission of the assessee. By AO’s own admission, the assessee conducted activity of money handling throughout the financial year 2010-11; and, the commission from cash handling during the financial year 2010-11 was w…

Radhey Ram Godara, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for Statistical purposes

ITA 349/JPR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Nov 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT -DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

…es, expenses etc. In support of the above proposition, the reliance is placed upon the following judgments: (a) S. Kuppuswami Mudaliar VS. C.I.T. [51 ITR 757 (MAD)] (b)Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. VS.C.I.T.[123 ITR 457 (SC)] © C.I.T. VS. Prem Chand Jain [189 ITR 320 (P&H)] In view of the decisions in CIT v. Ram Sanehi Gian Chand [1972] 86 ITR 724 and Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT [1980] 123 ITR 457C. (d) C.I.T. VS. Tyaryamal Balchand 165 ITR 453 (Raj.) In the present case, the ITO was within his right to tax the amount of Rs.16,950 as income from undisclosed sources even though he had added the amo…