How many judgments cite Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT?

136 judgments on BharatTax cite Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT (247 ITR 290), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115BBE, Section 68, Section 145(3), Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 144.

Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT

247 ITR 290High Court2001#751 most cited

What is Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT authority for?

Income deemed under sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, or 69C of the Income-tax Act is a distinct category, separate from regular heads of income under Section 14, and losses from other heads, including business losses, cannot be set off against such deemed income.

136

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT · 247 ITR 290 · Section 68 · Section 69 · Section 115BBE · Section 71 · deemed income · unexplained investments · set off of losses · business loss set off

Also reported as

120 Taxmann 11

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 68 Section 145(3)Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 144 Section 142(1)Section 153D

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 155bbe section 69d section 66 set off of losses section 40(b)section 155 section 69b survey under section 133a preponderance of probability profits and gains of business or profession section 115bb section 115b

Judgments citing Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT

Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

ITA 1029/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…eemed income is not income from salary, house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from other sources' Held, yes. [Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 120 Taxman 11 (Gujarat)/[2001] 247 ITR 290 (Gujarat)/[2001] 165 CTR 111 (Gujarat) [10-08-2000]] These are the special provisions dealing with the situation and the incomes which are the subject matter of the contention in the appeal and being the specific provisions they are preferred and override the general provisions. Sections 68/69/69A etc. also provides for year of taxation of asse…

Dinesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68Section 69C

…emed income is not income from salary, house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' Held, yes. [Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 120 Taxman 11 (Gujarat)/[2001] 247 ITR 290 (Gujarat)/[2001] 165 CTR 111 (Gujarat) [10-08-2000]]. In the judgements referred by the appellant, the above referred judgements of honourable Supreme Court have not been considered. 5 Sh. Dinesh Kumar Soni vs. DCIT Further the facts of the case of the appellant are different as these pertain to the deposit of cash during the demonetisation per…

Yash Construction Co., Latur vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Aurangabad

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

ITA 677/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 115BSection 250Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.676 & 677/PUN/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Yash Construction Co., Asst. CIT, Ajinkya City, Ambajogai Road, Circle-Nanded Latur-413512 Vs. PAN : AAAFY8593Q अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Department by : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date of hearing : 29-07-2024 Date of 31-07-2024 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM…

Yash Construction Co., Nanded vs. ACIT, Circle, Nanded

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

ITA 676/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 115BSection 250Section 69C

Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 41/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala The Income Tax Officer 122 Kutbi Mohalla 1/N Kalupur Vs Ward-1(2)(4) Darwaja Ahmedabad Kalupur Ahmedabad – 380 001 Gujarat Pan:Eqepk 9096 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Sadhwani, Ar Revenue By : Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16 /05/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthe Present Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2023, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Taken By The Assessee: Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sadhwani, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

…cheme of deeming fiction in section 69A of the Act inappropriately and invoked section 115BBE of the Act wrongly. The counsel for the assessee placed the reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan Vs. CIT (2001) 247 ITR 290. g. The Ld.CIT(A) has not considered the fact that out of Rs.10,00,000/- deposited in The Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-op. Bank, Relief Road Branch A/c. No. 066002001008525, Rs.5,00,000/- were belonging to Shabbir Kantawala, brother of the assessee and Rs.4,00,000/- were belonging to Yousuf Kantawala, deceased brother of the assessee. h. While giving…

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Fatehabad vs. DCIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 80/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 20/01/2023 In Appeal No. 10853/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 20/01/2023 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishaba Marwaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

…as to be identified. Income from unexplained or unknown sources cannot therefore be considered or taxed as income from other sources. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Fakir Mohamed Haji Hasan V. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 290/(2002] 120 Taxman 11 in which the Hon'ble High Court has held as under:- "The scheme of sections 69,69A, 69B and 69C of the Income-tax Act 1961, would show that in cases where the nature and source of investments made by the assessee or the nature and source of acquisition of money, bullion etc. owned by the assessee or the source of expenditure…

Rajiv Kumar Goyal, Dhuri vs. DCIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 03/02/2023 In Appeal No. 10850/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 03/02/2023 Which Is Hereiafter Referred To As The Impugned Order. Factual Matrix 3. The Assessee Had For The Relevant Year I.E; A.Y. 2019-20 Was Also Engaged In The Same Business I.E; Manufacturing Of Pvc Pipes & Had Filed

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishaba Marwaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. D.R

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 250(6)Section 253

…fore, it was deemed income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act, as no source was declared by the assessee and in the absence of nature of source of cash being proved, the same is not assessable as income from business. ii) Fakir Mohmed Haji HasanVs. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 290 in the Gujarat High Court Wherein it is stated that the "deemed income" of the nature covered under the scheme of sections 69, 69A, 69B and 69C being treated separately, because such deemed income is not income from salary, house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor as it income from "other sources" becaus…

M/S Satwant Agro Engineers, Bhawanigarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…has to be identified. Income from unexplained or unknown sources cannot therefore be considered or taxed as income from other sources. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Fakir Mohamed Haji Hasan V. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 290/[2002] 120 Taxman 11 in which the Hon'ble High Court has held as under:- "The scheme of sections 69,69A, 69B and 69C of the Income-tax Act 1961, would show that in cases where the nature and source of investments made by the assessee or the nature and source of acquisition of money, bullion etc. owned by the assessee or the source of expenditure…

M/S.Prism Share Trading Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 6466/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 68

…n rendered by Chennai bench of Tribunal in the case of Akr Poly Industries (ITA No.1042/Mds/2012 dated 29-01-2013), which in turn had placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Fakir Mohamed Haji Hasan vs. CIT (2001)(247 ITR 290)(Guj) 3. Aggrieved against the order passed by Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A). Before Ld CIT(A), it was submitted that there was corresponding buyer named M/s Sneha Metals, which has purchased the commodities sold by the assessee. However, the Ld CIT(A) did not agree with the contentions of the assessee and af…

Suresh Bhavarlal Soni, Dhule vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Dhule Circle, Dhule

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 223/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.223/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha PaswalFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 115BSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.223/PUN/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Suresh Bhavarlal Soni, Vs. ACIT, Deepak Jewellers, 1712, Dhule Circle, Tar Galli, Saraf Bazar, Dhule Dhule 424 001 Maharashtra PAN : ABLPS6763N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Shikha Paswal Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 18.04.2024 Date of pronouncement : 18.04.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT(A), Pune-11 dated 25.01…

Sri Sravan Kumar Neela, Nalgonda vs. ACIT Central Circle 1, Kozhikode

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

ITA 899/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 69A

…d the Assessing Officer rightly invoked sections 69A and 115BBE. [(*) 26/7/2016; that dated 27/7/2016 is for copy of his deposition] 4.11 Reliance is also placed on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan [2002] 120 Taxman 11/247 ITR 290 and decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kim Pharma Pvt Ltd. [2013] 35 Taxmann.com 456/258 CTR 454.’ (emphasis and notation, ours) 3.2 We firstly observe absence of any factual basis for the assessee to raise this legal ground. This is as vide his letter/s dated 21/3/2019 in penalty proceedings (PB pgs. 120-123), the assessee…

Sri Uma Maheshwara Rao Chinni, Guntur vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

ITA 895/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 69A

M/S Jashan Finlease Ltd., Khanna vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 68Section 69

…and has rightly been brought to tax as unexplained income under section 69 of the Act read with provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act. 13. Further reference was drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Fakir Mohamad Haji Hasan Vs. CIT 247 ITR 290, decisions of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs. Khusi Ram & Sons Foods(P) Ltd. in ITA NO. 126 of 2015 (O&M) dt. 21/07/2016, in case of Kim Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 216 Taxman 153 (P&H) ITA No. 106 of 2011(O&M), and decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of Maruthi Babu Rao Jadav Vs. ACIT in WA No. 984 of 2019 dt. 2…

M/S Singh Construction Co., Patiala vs. ACIT, Circle, Patial

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1120/CHANDI/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipen Sethi, Advocate and Shri Shashi Bhushan Galav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263Section 68

…to be treated as profits of the business is not tenable. The amount surrendered during the course of survey on account of unexplained stock or cash is required to be deemed income of the assessee u/s 69 of Act. In the case of Faqir Mohammad Hazi Hasan vs CIT 247 ITR 290 (Gujarat), the Hon'ble High Court has held that the entire surrendered income should be treated as independent of regular income and taxed accordingly. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in their order dated 30.04.2010 in the case of M/s Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-1 Ambala Cantt, Ambala in ITA No.…

Sh. Lachhman Dass Bansal, Barnala vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 34/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69Section 69A

…ch deemed income falling under Chapter-VI, under any of the heads including 'income from other sources' but they will be aggregated along with the incomes computed under Chapter IV. The judgments cited supra i.e.: (1) Fakir Mohammed Haji Hasan Vs. CIT ([2001] 247 ITR 290 (Guj.) (2) PCIT vs. M/s. Khushi Ram & Sons Pvt. Ltd., the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in ITA No. 126 of 2015 dated 21.07.2016 (3) SVS Oil Mills vs. ACIT, Chennai, the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in ITA No. 765 of 2018 dated 26.03.2019 (4) Kim Pharma Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT in ITA No. 106 of 2011 dated 27.04.2011, (5) The Hon'ble Supreme Cou…

Sh. Krishan Kumar, Khanna vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 175/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.175/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2019-20 Shri Krishan Kumar, Vs. The DCIT, Prop., M/s Riwaz Jeweller, Central Circle-1, बनाम Karnail Singh Road, Ludhiana Subash Bazar, Khanna 141401 "थायीलेखासं./PAN No.AKRPK5188J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of H…

Alishan Steels Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 999/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Roy, FCA & Shri B. K. Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. CIT, DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…unexplained u/s. 68 to be taxed separately @ 30%. He further held that this income is not eligible to be set off against the business loss for which he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Fakir Mohmed Haji Hassam Vs. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 290. Alishan Steels Pvt. Ltd., AYs 2011-12 & 2015-16 4.1. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein it was submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court relied on by the Ld. AO is distinguishable since in that case no adjustment of loss was adjudicated upon. Assessee had submitted that section 115BBE was introduced…

Alishan Steels (P)Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1001/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Roy, FCA & Shri B. K. Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. CIT, DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 68

The ACIT Central-Ujjain, Ujjain vs. M/S Italian Edibles P Ltd, Indore

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 219/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central) M/S. Italian Edibles Pvt. Ujjain Ltd. Vs. Udhyog Nagar, Palda Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee /Respondent) Pan: Aacci 2746N Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bumb Ars Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2023

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69Section 69B

…m other sources and consequently the provision of section 69B/69C are applicable. Ld. CIT-DR has relied upon the order of the AO and submitted that the AO has also relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in case of Fakir Mohd Kazi Hasan vs. CIT 247 ITR 290 (Guj) as well as judgment of Hon’ble Kerla High Court in case of CIT vs. Kerala Sponge Ltd. 379 ITR 330. Page 4 of 20 ITANo.219/Ind/2022 Italian Edible Pvt. 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has explained the source of the investment in excess stock in the statement recorded during the survey. He has r…

Shri Tejpal Singh, Amritsar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

In the result, appeal of the assesseeITA No

ITA 266/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 266/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 266/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sh. Tejpal Singh Prop. M/s Vs. Asst. / Dy. Commissioner Simran Medicos Opp. Shri Guru of Income tax, Central Ram Dass Hospital,Amritsar. Circle, Amritsar. [PAN:-ACSPS8142F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, CA. Respondent by Sh. Sandeep Dahia, CIT DR. Date of Hearing 05.12.2023 06.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement ORDER Per: Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed agai…