ITO v. Naveen Gupta

5 SOT 94Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#15920 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Judgments citing ITO v. Naveen Gupta

DCIT, Chennai vs. Tvs Investments Lrd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue's appeal as well as the assessee's Cross Objection are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 262/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.262/Chny/2017 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit M/S. Tvs Capital Funds (P) Limited (Formerly Known As Tvs Investments Limited) Corporate Circle-3(1) बनाम/ Jayalakshmi Estates, Chennai-600 034. Vs. No.29, (Old No.8), Haddows Road Chennai-600 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-1154-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. D. Praveen (Jcit) -Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Dr. D. Praveen (JCIT) -Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)-Ld. AR

…ing low and high prices of some quoted shares during the 52 weeks as per Economic Times dated 27.02.2007 from which it can be seen that some shares increased even by more than 100 times." 14.4 The Tribunal, Delhi 'C' Bench in the case of ITO vs. Naveen Gupta (5 SOT 94), has observed as under :"Nevertheless, it is also noteworthy that the A.O. has failed to establish that in lieu of the aforesaid sale proceeds, the assessee has surreptitiously introduced his unaccounted money in the bank account. After having perused the entire material that is available on record, there is no averment, much less any evidence, wit…

Deepak Nagar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-17, New Delhi

ITA 3212/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2015-16] Shri Deepak Nagar Vs. The A.C.I.T C-1/67, Safdarjang Development Area Central Circle -17 New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaipn 5965 B [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68

…of regarding the genuineness of the transaction and any addition, if made, on these facts would not be tenable. Reliance in this regard may be had to the decision of jurisdictional tribunal in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 20(1) vs. Naveen Gupta [2006] 5 SOT 94 (Delhi). Hence no change in characterization is warranted as the same would be unjust and untenable. ” 8. Reply of the assessee did not find any favour with the Assessing Officer who further observed as under: “The above reply of the assessee was considered but not found in the light of the facts narrated in the report received from the DIT(Inv.),…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…proceeds of shares.‖— Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) and Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT (1980) 19 CTR (SC) 360 : (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) applied; Ashok Kumar Agarwal vs. Asstt. CIT (ITA No. 129/Agra/2004) and ITO vs. Naveen Gupta (2006) 5 SOT 94 (Del) approved. (Paras 12 & 13) ―It was the duty of the AO to bring on record sufficient evidences and material to prove that the documents filed by the assessee were bogus, false or fabricated and the long-term capital gain shown by him was actually his income from undisclosed sources. The only material to support such conclusion of the lower autho…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…proceeds of shares.‖— Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) and Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT (1980) 19 CTR (SC) 360 : (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) applied; Ashok Kumar Agarwal vs. Asstt. CIT (ITA No. 129/Agra/2004) and ITO vs. Naveen Gupta (2006) 5 SOT 94 (Del) approved. (Paras 12 & 13) ―It was the duty of the AO to bring on record sufficient evidences and material to prove that the documents filed by the assessee were bogus, false or fabricated and the long-term capital gain shown by him was actually his income from undisclosed sources. The only material to support such conclusion of the lower autho…

Asst CIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Pratiksha Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3479/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…ble with him for purchase of shares as well as realization of the sale proceeds and crediting the same to the bank account of the assessee - CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition." 3.30. The ratio laid down in the case of ITO Vs. Naveen Gupta (2006) 5 SOT 94 (Del) (Page Nos 730- 738 of the Paper Book - II) supports the case of the assessee, wherein, it was held as under: "Income from undisclosed sources - Cash credits - Addition - Validity - Long term capital gain from sale of shares of company 'A' - Company listed on Delhi Stock Exchange - No material brought on record by the AO to show that assessee…

ACIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Pratiksha B Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4655/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…ble with him for purchase of shares as well as realization of the sale proceeds and crediting the same to the bank account of the assessee - CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition." 3.30. The ratio laid down in the case of ITO Vs. Naveen Gupta (2006) 5 SOT 94 (Del) (Page Nos 730- 738 of the Paper Book - II) supports the case of the assessee, wherein, it was held as under: "Income from undisclosed sources - Cash credits - Addition - Validity - Long term capital gain from sale of shares of company 'A' - Company listed on Delhi Stock Exchange - No material brought on record by the AO to show that assessee…

ITO v. Naveen Gupta (5 SOT 94) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax