Rajiv Jain v. ITO

410 ITR 179High Court2019#20804 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also reported as

101 Taxmann.com 92

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 143(3)Section 44AD Section 68 Section 69/69B Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

addition u/s 68 section 115bb section 115b section 115bbe section 115 undisclosed income section 68 section 11 person business document interest

Judgments citing Rajiv Jain v. ITO

Hitesh Jagat Parekh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 25(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 4429/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaravs. Ito, Ward 25(2)(4) Hitesh Jagat Prekh R No. 218, Kautilya 2-3, Ground Floor, Shivam Bhavn, C-41 To C-43, Hatkesh Society, N.S. G Block, Bkc, Bandra Road, No.8, Vile Parle (W) (E), Mumbai – 400 056. Mumbai – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Agqpp9134J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

…in his account were on account of sales being made by him from Kirana business, tax authorities were justified in making addition of unexplained cash entries in bank account in hands of assessee. 10. Rajiv Jain Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.com 92 (Delhi)/[2019] 410 ITR 179 (Delhi) wherein it was held that where assessee challenged addition made to its income under section 68 in respect of amount deposited in bank contending that said amount came from sale of wearing apparel and traditional silver utensils, since there was no evidence and material to establish sale or inheritance, etc., impugned addition made by aut…

Sumit Prakashrao Fulzele, Chandrapur vs. ITO Ward 2, Chandrapur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

Fine Gujranwala Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-51(3), New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1540/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Advocate

Section 285BSection 68

…made by him from Kirana business, tax authorities were justified in making addition of unexplained cash entries in bank account in hands of assessee. 3. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rajiv Jain Vs ITO in [2019] 101 taxmann.com 92 (Delhi)/[2019j 410 ITR 179 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that where assessee challenged addition made to its income under section 68 in respect of amount deposited in bank contending that said amount came from sale of wearing apparel and traditional silver utensils, since there was no evidence and material to establish sale or inheritance, etc., impugned addition made b…

Shri Manish Kumar Mukim, Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-2, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 233/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 148

…in the 7 different bank accounts which were not disclosed by the assessee in the return of income or in the balance sheet has been rightly considered as unexplained income of the assessee. He has relied upon the following decisions:- 1. Rajiv Jain vs. ITO 410 ITR 179 (Delhi) 2. CIT vs. Sarwankumar Sharma 227 taxman 34 (Gujarat) 3. Truptiben Bakulbhai Patel vs. ITO (Gujarat) 4. Champalal S. Shah vs. Ito 86 taxmann.com 258 (Mumbai Trib.) Thus, the ld. DR has supported the orders of the authorities below. In rejoinder the ld. AR has submitted that the confirmation were signed by different persons because the…