Sangla HUF v. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore)

247 ITR 568High Court2001#15433 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorrule of consistencysection 148asection 115bbsection 115bsection 132(4)unexplained moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 115bbesection 115section 271(1)(c)undisclosed income

Judgments citing Sangla HUF v. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore)

Anil Dhakad, Indore vs. Aasst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Indore

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 454/IND/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…assessee then the provisions of section 69A as well as section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable. In support of his contention he has relied upon following decisions: i.Mukesh Sangla HUF vs. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore) ii.Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT 247 ITR 568 (Guj.) iii. DCIT vs. Tapesh Tyagi (ITAT, Delhi)-ITA No.1344/Del/2021 order dt. 27.10.2023 iv. Jayashri Shrikant Deshmukh vs. ACIT (ITAT, Pune) ITANo.776/Pun/2022 v.Ram Kishan vs. ITO in ITANo.1909/Del/2020 (ITAT, Delhi) vi. D.N. Singh vs. CIT (2023) 454 ITR 595 (SC) vii. CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries P. ltd. 155 ITR 711 (SC) 3.2…

Anil Dhakad, Indore vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Indore

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 453/IND/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…assessee then the provisions of section 69A as well as section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable. In support of his contention he has relied upon following decisions: i.Mukesh Sangla HUF vs. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore) ii.Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT 247 ITR 568 (Guj.) iii. DCIT vs. Tapesh Tyagi (ITAT, Delhi)-ITA No.1344/Del/2021 order dt. 27.10.2023 iv. Jayashri Shrikant Deshmukh vs. ACIT (ITAT, Pune) ITANo.776/Pun/2022 v.Ram Kishan vs. ITO in ITANo.1909/Del/2020 (ITAT, Delhi) vi. D.N. Singh vs. CIT (2023) 454 ITR 595 (SC) vii. CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries P. ltd. 155 ITR 711 (SC) 3.2…

Anil Dhakad, Indore vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Location

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 452/IND/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…assessee then the provisions of section 69A as well as section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable. In support of his contention he has relied upon following decisions: i.Mukesh Sangla HUF vs. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore) ii.Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT 247 ITR 568 (Guj.) iii. DCIT vs. Tapesh Tyagi (ITAT, Delhi)-ITA No.1344/Del/2021 order dt. 27.10.2023 iv. Jayashri Shrikant Deshmukh vs. ACIT (ITAT, Pune) ITANo.776/Pun/2022 v.Ram Kishan vs. ITO in ITANo.1909/Del/2020 (ITAT, Delhi) vi. D.N. Singh vs. CIT (2023) 454 ITR 595 (SC) vii. CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries P. ltd. 155 ITR 711 (SC) 3.2…

Anil Dhakad, Indore vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Indore

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 451/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…assessee then the provisions of section 69A as well as section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable. In support of his contention he has relied upon following decisions: i.Mukesh Sangla HUF vs. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore) ii.Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT 247 ITR 568 (Guj.) iii. DCIT vs. Tapesh Tyagi (ITAT, Delhi)-ITA No.1344/Del/2021 order dt. 27.10.2023 iv. Jayashri Shrikant Deshmukh vs. ACIT (ITAT, Pune) ITANo.776/Pun/2022 v.Ram Kishan vs. ITO in ITANo.1909/Del/2020 (ITAT, Delhi) vi. D.N. Singh vs. CIT (2023) 454 ITR 595 (SC) vii. CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries P. ltd. 155 ITR 711 (SC) 3.2…

Lilaben Jagdishbhai Thakkar, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedbad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 361/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Lilaben Jagdishbhai Thakkar, I.T.O., 1311, Prop. Of M/S. Ashish Hosiery, Vs. Ward-1(2)(3), Amba Bhuvan, Rajapatels Pole, Ahmedabad. Tankshal Road, Kalupur, Ahmedabad-380001. Pan: Aakpt1601L

For Appellant: Smt. Gouriben P. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 148

…rtly allowing cash deposit in bank out of total cash deposit of Rs.6.50,0007- and partly disallowing. [4] Learned CIT (appeal) has erred in law and facts in not following Hon'ble Gujarat High- Court decision in case of Piyushkumar O. Desai v/s CIT reported in 247 ITR 568(Guj). [5] Learned CIT (appeal) ought of have accepted the cash deposited in bank out of the cash available in cash book maintained on day to day basis. [6] Appellant reserves the right to add or to alter any further grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. The only effective issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in sus…

Solitare World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2638/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2638/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Solitare World Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Shop No. 6, Second Floor, 2633 & 2634, Central Circle-25, Plot No. 2490250, Gurudwara Road, New Delhi Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaocs1369R Assessee By : Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. & Sh. Hiren Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69C

…cannot be treated as net profit and the GP should be applied. Reliance is placed on following judgments of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court:— (i) CIT vs. President Industries [2002] 258 ITR 654/124 Taxman 654 (Guj.) (ii) Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 568/114 Taxman 281 (Guj.) 5. Ld. DR relied on the orders of ld. CIT(A). It is contended that the findings of ld. CIT(A) are pure finding of facts on the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases, therefore, the case laws cited by assessee being on different facts cannot be applied in the absence of factual parity. 6. I have heard the rival co…

Sangla HUF v. DCIT 27 ITJ 172 (Trib. Indore) (247 ITR 568) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax