Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi v. CIT

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

…e, warrants no interference as it is not a substantial question of law. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Harjeev Aggarwal reported in (2016) 290 CTR (Del) 263 and KailashbenManharlal Chokshi Versus Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2010) 328 ITR 411 (Guj) various High Courts have held that addition based solely on statement later on retracted, without anything more, could not be justified in law. Thus, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. In view of the above consideration, we are of the view that this appeal does not involve any substantial question of law and is, therefore, di…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Ritesh Jain, Indore

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

…obtain confession as to the undisclosed income while recording the statement during the course of search and seizure and survey operations. Ld. AR has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi vs. CIT 328 ITR 411. Ld. AR has submitted that in the absence of any corroborative evidence the statement recorded which was subsequently retracted cannot be used against the assessee as a piece of evidence. 13.2 Ld. AR has further submitted that without prejudice to the above contentions even the transactions of loan between M/s. M.P. Nutri Foods Ltd. and the lend…

Bhaveshbhai Amulakhbhai Sonani, Surat vs. DCIT, Central Circlle-3, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2022 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Bhaveshkumar Deputy Commissioner Of Amulakhbhai Sonani, A- Income-Tax, Central Vs 604, Sai Residency, Near Circle-3, Surat, 5Thfloor, Gajera School, Katargam, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395004 Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No: Apsps 0912 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 17.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [For Short To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 03.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2018- 19, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 28.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:- Bhaveshkumar A Sonani “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In In Making An Addition Of Rs.16,32,732/- U/S 69A Of The Act Treating The Jewellery Found & Seized During The Cruse Of Search As Unexplained, On Erroneous Grounds Without Appreciating That The Same Is Fully Reflected In The Appellant’S & His Family Member’S Regular Books Of Accounts. Hence, The Impugned Addition As Confirmed By The Learned Cit(A) Needs To Be Deleted As Being Absolutely Erroneous, Incorrect, Illegal & Bad-In-Law.

…e permissible limit as declared by CBDT Circular (supra). 7. To support his submission, Ld. AR for the assessee relied upon on the Circular of CBDT (supra), decision of tribunal in case of Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi Vs CIT [2008] 174 Taxman 466 (Guj)/[2010] 328 ITR 411 (Guj). CIT Vs Ashok Chandra Kant Gandhi [2014] 41 taxmann. com 121 (Guj)/[2014] 222 Taxman 119 (Guj), CIT Vs Ratanlal Vyaparilal Jain [2010[ 2 taxman.com 997 (Guj)/[2011] 339 ITR 351 (Guj), Ashok Chadha vs. ITO [2011] 14 taxmann.com. 57 (Del)/[2011] 202 Taxman 395 (Del), CIT Vs Satya Naraini Patni [2014] 46 taxmann.com 440 (Raj)/[2014] 224 Taxman…

Shashi Bhushan Sinha, Patna vs. ACIT, Central Circl-3, Patna

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

…ITA No. 13/PAT/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shashi Bhusan Sinha IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 13/PAT/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shashi Bhusan Sinha,............................. Appellant Plot No. 501, Laxmi Hari Niwas, Kavi Raman Path, Nageshwar Colony, Patna-800001, Bihar [PAN:AMDPS1029A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar Appearances by: Shri Alok Kumar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of t…