Moongipa Investment Limited v. ITO

18 DTR 413High Court2009#6591 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 113

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271AAASection 1961Section 69Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 153(1)(a)section 271aaasection 153(1)section 271aasection 271apenalty under section 271(1)(c)section 44ainterest u/s 234aundisclosed incomecommissioner (appeals)unexplained moneysection 271(1)

Judgments citing Moongipa Investment Limited v. ITO

RAKESH SARDANA,KARNAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, KARNAL, KARNAL

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

ITA 1564/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: the ld. CIT (A) and raised several grounds of appeal and in response to notices by the ld. CIT (A), assessee has filed submissions which were not filed before the AO. Accordingly, a remand report was called for from the AO on 16.11.2023 and no response from the AO side. With regard to issue raised by the assessee i.e. assessment is bad in law, the assessee has submitted before the ld. CIT (A) that assessee has regularly filed return of income with ITO, Ward 5, Karnal and the notices of asse

For Appellant: Shri Somil Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rakesh Sardana, vs. ITO, Ward 5, H.No.509, Jarnailly Colony, Karnal. Karnal – 132 001 (Haryana). (PAN : APQPS4520Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Shri Shrey Jain, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.06.2024 Date of Order : 30.08.2024 ORDER The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 21.02.2024 for the…

SMT. PERMILA DEVI YADAV,ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD-BEHROR, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

…we can safely presume that the cash withdrawn from the bank was available with the assessee which was subsequently deposited with the bank. Therefore, we cannot treat the same as undisclosed income of the assessee. (3) ACIT Vs. Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. (2009) 18 DTR 413 (Del.) (Trib.) The Hon'ble ITAT vide Para 27 held as under:- We find that this explanation of the assessee was found correct that against these five deposits on dt. 14.06.1996, Rx. 31,000: 21.07.1997. Rs.1.27.000; 18.09.1997. Rs. 22,000, 4.10.1997, Rs.26,000 and on 7.11.1997, Rs. 52,000 there were sufficient cash withdrawals from AWI and from SBL…

SATISH CHANDRA GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 509/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

…f the present evidence (Murray's English Dictionary). Evidence can be oral and cannot be discarded on this ground. It is noticed that ITAT Delhi 6 SHRI SATISH CHANDRA GUPTA VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR Bench in the case of ACIT v. Baldev Raj Charla reported in 18 DTR 413 (Del) has held that where there were sufficient cash withdrawal to cover cash deposits, merely because there was time gap between withdrawal of cash and cash deposits, addition on account of cash deposits cannot be made. It was held as under:- “23. Ground No. 2 of the cross-objection in the case of Shri B.R. Charla reads as under: "Whether the le…

SATYA WATI L/H OF LATE SH. RADHAY LAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-34(6), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1371/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. For the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced below:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1371/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Smt. Satya Wati L/H of Income Tax Officer Late Sh. Radhay Lal Ward-37(3) 120, Sarai Jullena Okhla Vs. New Delhi Road, New Delhi-110 025 PAN-AECPW 4676C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Shrey Jain, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/06/2024 Date of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. The both appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the orders of Learned C…

SATYA WATI L/H OF LATE SH. RADHAY LAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 37(3), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1370/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. For the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced below: “1. The appellant is an Agriculturist and has no income other than Interest on savings and term deposits in bank, during the previous relevant to assessment year under appeal.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1371/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Smt. Satya Wati L/H of Income Tax Officer Late Sh. Radhay Lal Ward-37(3) 120, Sarai Jullena Okhla Vs. New Delhi Road, New Delhi-110 025 PAN-AECPW 4676C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Shrey Jain, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/06/2024 Date of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. The both appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the orders of Learned C…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2997/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2996/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2994/DEL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2814/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2813/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

RAJESH MANGLA,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2811/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…thdrawals. In support of said contention, ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions:- i. Jaya Aggarwal vs ITO [2018] 254 taxman 398 (Del) ii. Moongipa Investment Limited vs ITO [2012] 70 DTR 132 iii. ACIT vs Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. [2009] 18 DTR 413 21. Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals). 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the bank account statement, in the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash amounting…

NANJAPPA UMASHANKER,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1) , BANGALORE

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

ITA 799/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Prathik P., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69A

…ITA No.799/Bang/2023 Sri Nanjappa Umashanker, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sri Nanjappa Umashanker No.145, Lakshmamma Building M. Nanjappa Compound ITO K. Narayanapura Ward-4(2)(1) Vs. Bengaluru 560 077 Bangalore Karnataka PAN NO : AATPU3699N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Prathik P., A.R. Respondent by : Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue Date of Hearing : 26.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 01.01.2024 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JABALPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH KUMAR AGRAWAL, JABALPUR

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue and cross both appeal of the Revenue and cross both appeal of the Revenue and cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7/JAB/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle, Jabalpur, Shri Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, 291, Ramanth Building, Napier 01/32/33, Ashirwad Market, Town, Jabalpur-482001 Vs. Lordganj, Jabalpur-482001. Pan No. Achpa 7963 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Shiv Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “DB” JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Central Circle, Jabalpur, Shri Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, 291, Ramanth Building, Napier 01/32/33, Ashirwad Market, Town, Jabalpur-482001 Vs. Lordganj, Jabalpur-482001. PAN No. ACHPA 7963 K Appellant Respondent CO No. 7/JAB/2021 (Arising out of ITA No. 7/JAB/2021) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, DCIT, Central Circle, Jabalpur, 01/32/33, Ashirwad Market, 291, Ramanth Building, Napier Vs. Lordganj, Jabalpur-482001. Town,…

CLAYTON CHARLES PINTO,MUMBAI vs. INT TAX WARD 3(3)(1) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 102/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleclayton Charles Pinto Mumbai. V. Int Tax Ward 3(3)(1) Mumbai. Air India Building, Mumbai- 400021 303 Palm Beach Apartments, 31 J P Road, Andheri West Mumbai- 400061

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Clayton Charles Pinto Mumbai. v. INT TAX WARD 3(3)(1) Mumbai. Air India Building, Mumbai- 400021 303 Palm Beach Apartments, 31 J P Road, Andheri West Mumbai- 400061 PAN: AXIPP2068E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Bhupendra Shah, CA Department Represented by : Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. AR) Date of conclusion of Hearing : 30.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 09.06.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) CLAYTON CHARLES PINT…

BALLU SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -65(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.799 & 800/Del/2020 [Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2009-10] Ballu Singh, vs ITO, H.No.415, Sec-22, Gurgaon, Ward-65(5), Haryana-122016. New Delhi. PAN-ARBPS7573G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri N.K.Ishwar & Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : These two appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2008- 09 and 2009-10 are directed against the different orders of Ld. CIT(A…

BALLU SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -65(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.799 & 800/Del/2020 [Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2009-10] Ballu Singh, vs ITO, H.No.415, Sec-22, Gurgaon, Ward-65(5), Haryana-122016. New Delhi. PAN-ARBPS7573G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri N.K.Ishwar & Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 15.05.2023 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : These two appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2008- 09 and 2009-10 are directed against the different orders of Ld. CIT(A…

SH. SURESH KUMAR AGARWAL,B-9, GOVIND MARG, RAJA PARK, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 115BSection 69A

…e, we can safely presume that the cash withdrawn from the bank was available with the assessee which was subsequently deposited with the bank. Therefore, we cannot treat the same as undisclosed income of the assessee. ACIT Vs. Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. (2009) 18 DTR 413 (Del.) (Trib.) The Hon’ble ITAT vide Para 27 held as under:- We find that this explanation of the assessee was found correct that against these five deposits on dt. 14.06.1996, Rs. 31,000; 21.07.1997, Rs.1,27,000; 18.09.1997, Rs. 22,000; 4.10.1997, Rs.26,000 and on 7.11.1997, Rs. 52,000 there were sufficient cash withdrawals from AWI and from SB…

GURVINDER SINGH,KARNAL vs. ITO, WARD-2, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 549/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.549/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Gurvinder Singh Ito C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, D-28, Vs. Ward 2, South Extension, Part-1, Karnal. New Delhi. Pan No. Bztps8710G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…sions in support of his submission that when once the assessee explained that I.T.A.No.549/Del/2019 the cash deposit was made from out of cash withdrawals addition cannot be made as unexplained cash credit: 1. ACIT Vs. Baldev Raj Charla & Ors. reported in 18 DTR 413; 2. Moongipa Investment Limited Vs. ITO reported in 70 DTR 132; 3. Jaya Aggarwal Vs. ITO reported in 165 DTR 97 (Del). 4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the assessment order it can be seen that the addition…